Key Facts
- •Beth claims the Security Service (SIS) failed to protect her from abuse by her partner, X, allegedly a covert human intelligence source (CHIS).
- •Two key issues: whether the SIS can use the 'Neither Confirm Nor Deny' (NCND) policy regarding X's CHIS status, and the level of information restriction to protect X's identity.
- •Prior High Court litigation (Attorney General v BBC) addressed similar issues, granting some publication but restricting information about X.
- •Beth publicly stated her belief that X was a CHIS.
- •The Tribunal considered the balance between national security, Beth's fair trial rights, and the applicability of the NCND policy.
Legal Principles
The NCND policy regarding CHIS identity is a well-established approach, justified by the need to protect national security and the safety of informants.
DIL v Metropolitan Police [2014] EWHC 2184, Re Scapattici [2003] NIQB 56
NCND is not a legal principle but requires justification similar to public interest immunity.
Mohamed and CF v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 559
The court must balance the public interest in maintaining NCND against other competing public interests.
DIL v Metropolitan Police [2014] EWHC 2184
In national security cases, great respect must be paid to the assessment of responsible authorities.
R (Begum) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission [2021] UKSC 7
The IPT must balance protection of national security with the need for a fair trial, but the statutory scheme protects natural justice.
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) s.69(6), IPT Rules 7(1)
Outcomes
The SIS is permitted to rely on the NCND policy regarding X's CHIS status in the open proceedings.
Maintaining NCND is crucial for national security; the potential harm outweighs the impact on Beth's fair trial, which is mitigated by procedural safeguards and the Tribunal's access to all evidence.
The decision on NCND is not appealable under s.68(4C) of RIPA as it concerns a procedural matter.
The decision involved the Tribunal's discretion regarding disclosure and conduct of proceedings under the IPT Rules.