Murder and MI5: the extraordinary battle over what stays secret

by Rachel Morgan News Editor

Revelations have emerged regarding a case involving the British government’s use of “Neither Confirm Nor Deny” (NCND) policy, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest and the transparency of legal proceedings. The details center around a case where the government reportedly feared losing to Scappaticci, believing a judge might conclude he was not Stakeknife and compel ministers to disclose information.

Secret Briefings and Legal Precedent

Jon Boutcher has confirmed that the judge presiding over the case was secretly briefed on the true identity of Stakeknife before making a ruling. That judge, then Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland Lord Carswell, subsequently permitted the government to maintain its NCND position. This decision established a legal precedent for the policy’s use.

Did You Know? Lord Carswell’s ruling allowed the government to maintain its NCND policy, creating a legal precedent for its continued use.

Boutcher stated, “The full facts about this and the government’s explanation will never be known while it is able to hide behind the shield of NCND.”

A Potential Conflict of Interest

Further investigation by journalist John Ware revealed another layer to the situation. The government barrister who provided the secret briefing to Lord Carswell was Philip Sales. He later became Lord Sales, a Justice on the UK Supreme Court, and was involved in the Paul Thompson case.

The Thompson case is significant because Lord Sales’ ruling directly impacts whether Scappaticci can be publicly named and whether further details about the events can be disclosed, potentially including Lord Sales’ own involvement.

Expert Insight: The convergence of these roles – barrister in the initial briefing and later a deciding Justice in a related case – raises serious questions about impartiality and the potential for undue influence in sensitive legal matters. The NCND policy, designed for national security, appears to have created a situation where full transparency is obstructed.

The Supreme Court was asked whether Lord Sales’ prior role in the Scappaticci matter presented a conflict of interest regarding his participation in the Thompson case. The court responded with a statement asserting that “Great care is taken in the selection of the panels which will hear a case at the UK Supreme Court.”

The statement continued, “A Justice will not deal with a case where it is considered there is a conflict of interest and individual Justices are careful to ensure that they have none.”

What Could Happen Next

It is possible that further scrutiny will be applied to the selection process for Supreme Court Justices in cases with potential connections to past confidential briefings. A possible next step could involve calls for greater transparency regarding the NCND policy and its application. Analysts expect continued debate over the balance between national security and the public’s right to know.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the NCND policy?

The NCND policy, or “Neither Confirm Nor Deny” policy, is a government practice of refusing to confirm or deny the truth of certain allegations, typically related to intelligence operations.

Who is Lord Sales?

Lord Sales is a Justice on the UK Supreme Court. He was previously Philip Sales, the government barrister who secretly briefed Lord Carswell on the identity of Stakeknife.

What was Lord Carswell’s role in this matter?

Lord Carswell, then Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, heard the case after being secretly briefed on the identity of Stakeknife and ultimately allowed the government to maintain its NCND position, establishing a legal precedent for the policy.

Given these developments, how do you weigh the need for national security against the public’s right to transparency in legal proceedings?

You may also like

Leave a Comment