It sounds as though it could be criminal action in that case, which the provision would not apply to. It would be for the judge to decide whether what is being protected is embarrassment for the Government or national security and the interests of the nation. We can all start dreaming up—I did it myself a moment ago—fanciful cases where such a situation might arise. The judge would have to decide whether national security was at risk. It is a two-stage process, which I will not argue at length today, but what happens is that the judge can allow the closed material proceeding. At the end of the closed material proceeding he can revoke it, he can say that the proceedings should be gisted, he can say that the documents should all go in, but perhaps redacted in key places. There is wide discretion before he goes back to the open session. If a Government at some time want a closed hearing, they will get it only if they can satisfy the judge that national security is at risk.
Justice and Security Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clarke of Nottingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 18 December 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Justice and Security Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
555 c723 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-11-26 10:48:44 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2012-12-18/12121850000331
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2012-12-18/12121850000331
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2012-12-18/12121850000331