Damian O'Loan (Paris): The government, shamed by the criticisms in yesterday's coroner's report labelling MoD failures "lamentable", was perhaps only too aware of the attraction of dropping the idea of secret inquests from the failed Counter-Terrorism Bill. As ever though, they will revert to another piece of legislation to implement what is clearly neither wanted nor needed. If, as noted by Tom Griffin, the Conservatives continue to base their opposition on the needs of British service personnel only, it is possible that the general public will be at risk.
Secret inquests, along with internment without trial, formed part of the draconian Special Powers Act 1922 that failed spectacularly in Northern Ireland. The government claims the need to protect vital security information trumps the relevant human rights concerns. The concern is that if the state is involved in a death, it could use this legislation to conceal evidence, and prejudice the right to effective remedy. As we have seen in Northern Ireland with infiltration methods, and Britain with the de Menezes muder, there can be no certainty that this is an outlandish proposal.
The subject takes us directly to the most brutal and murkiest aspects of humanity. That is why independence is not only necessary for the electorate, but also for MPs to be able to exercise their votes in line with the fullest possible information. This would be relevant, for example, if military action against Iran, even Russia, continues to be discussed, as we would need to know if we were signing up to warfare techniques and alliances which would put our Geneva commitments at risk. We also need to be able to judge what level of protection British troops are entitled to, and have, when carrying out their duties.
It has been pointed out that there are deaths in which an inquest is still required by those seeking explanations of why they lost a loved one. Will those families be joined by those who so passionately opposed the Counter-Terrorism Bill against a less publicised future coroners reform bill? One newspaper has suggested that we are all better off without this kind of information - it is wrong, and it is a national security issue, but only because we could all be more at risk, if our law provides the means to conceal torturous acts.
