Britain's Sham Courts

I previously mentioned that Jack Straw's attempt to justify the continued detention of terrorist suspects without trial by reference to the appeal process available to the suspects - extraordinary enough in the face of the Law Lords' judgment against the government - was flawed, because the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) had already ruled they were being unjustifiably discriminated against.

Now the Independent reports that from judgments released under the Freedom of Information Act it is clear the judges on SIAC also have deep misgivings about the process because of the suspects' disadvantage in not being able to see the secret evidence and allegations used against them.

This on top of the resignation of Ian MacDonald, one of the QCs acting as the government's special advocate for the suspects, who called the law which allows arbitrary arrest and indefinite detention without trial an "odious blot on our legal landscape".