Politalks Podcast: House of Lords Judgement on Control Orders. Interview with Carl Gardner. By Charon QC

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

We have teamed up with Charon QC to do a series of podcasts. This is an interview with Carl Gardner, ex government lawyer and author of the Head of Legal blog about the House of Lords judgment those subject to Control Orders must now be informed of the case against them.

Lawcast 141: The House of Lords judgment on control orders

Today I am talking to Carl Gardner, ex government lawyer and author of the Head of Legal blog about the House of Lords judgment in Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) v AF (Appellant) (FC) and another (Appellant) and one other action

Lord Pannick, QC represented the lead appellant, AF “Since the Home Secretary can no longer impose control orders without telling the controlees the substance of the case they have to meet, the right decision — legally and politically — would be to abandon the discredited control order regime and concentrate on prosecuting in the criminal courts those against whom there is evidence of wrongdoing.”

We also cover Diane Abbot MP’s campaign about secret evidence

(Note: this podcast should appear in a player a the bottom of this post, but I am using a new Wordpress plugin so it may play a trick on me. Here is a download link in case of any problems,)

Carl Gardner comments:

Charon interviewed me this morning about Wednesday’s House of Lords judgment in Home Secretary v AF, in which they ruled, applying the European Court of Human Rights judgment in A v UK, that there is a breach of the article 6 Convention right in proceedings under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 if a control order is imposed and, on appeal to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission a “controlee” is unable to effectively to challenge the order because the essence of the case against him is kept secret for reasons of national security.

I’d appreciate comments on the use of what are essentially legal conversations with political implications on a political site. They are an attempt to bring solid and careful reflection on legal questions into the political niche. Do you think that it is a worthwhile exercise?

You can access our new “Politalks” podcast feed at feeds.feedburner.com/politalks.