Hooper on CMP & National Security

This episode features an interview with Hayley Hooper, of Homerton College, University of Cambridge on Closed Material Procedure and National Security.You can view her profile here: www.tinyurl.com/H-J-HooperWe discuss the following recent cases:= CF -v- Ministry of Defence =High Court of England & Wales: Queen's Bench Division (Irwin J)14 October 2014[2014] EWHC 3171 (QB)An applicant alleged that the UK government had colluded in torture and other ill-treatment that he had suffered abroad. He sought to recover damages from the government in a civil action. It had already been decided that it was necessary to exclude the applicant from parts of the civil trial to protect national security. The question was what level of detail of the government's defence must be disclosed to the applicant in order for him to have a fair trial of his civil action.www.tinyurl.com/CF-v-MOD-CMP= VB & ors -v- Westminster Magistrates' Court, Govt. of Rwanda & Crown Prosecution Service =Supreme Court (Lords Neuburger, Mance, Reed, Hughes & Toulson)5 November 2014[2014] UKSC 59The Government of Rwanda sought extradition of certain persons in the United Kingdom. Those persons claimed that their extradition would expose them to serious harm. The witnessess necessary to establish this could not be led, they said, if the witnessess thought the Government of Rwanda would become aware of the evidence they had given. The question was whether the court had any power to employ special measures to avoid this.www.tinyurl.com/VB-v-Rwanda= Carlile -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department =Supreme Court (Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lords Kerr, Clarke & Sumption)12 November 2014[2014] UKSC 60A group of MPs and members of the House of Lords wished to host a meeting with a prominent Iranian opposition politician. The Home Office denied a visa to that politician. The Home Secretary said granting a visa would damage relations with Iran and might expose the British Embassy to retaliation from the Iranian public. In assessing whether the interference with the freedom of expression of the politician and parliamentarians was proportionate, what degree of respect should be accorded to the views of the Home Secretary? How intrusive should review be by the court?www.tinyurl.com/Carlile-v-SSHD== About the series ==You can follow the show on twitter (@podslaw), where every new episode will be announced. You can also subscribe through iTunes:www.tinyurl.com/podslaw-iTunes