O'Connor–Keogh official secrets trial
In November 2005, Civil servant David Keogh was charged with offences under section 3, and parliamentary researcher Leo O'Connor under section 5, of the Official Secrets Act 1989 in the United Kingdom. Both men were of Northampton, England.[1]
They appeared on November 29, 2005 in the Bow Street Magistrates' Court in London. They were remanded on bail, to return to the court on January 10 for a committal hearing.
The charges against the pair relate to the alleged leak of a document containing what purports to be a discussion between Tony Blair and George W. Bush at one point. It is alleged this document shows that Blair had to dissuade Bush from bombing Al Jazeera in Qatar.
On January 10, 2006, their defence lawyer was shown the secret Al Jazeera bombing memo and declared it posed no threat to national security. He vowed to have it made public by the court. The case would return to court on January 24. [2] [3]
The trial was due to begin on October 9, 2006. However, on that date the judge ruled the hearing should be in secret. It was then reported that the trial itself would begin on April 18, 2007. [4][5]
In arguing for the trial to remain secret, the government claimed the memo "could have a serious impact upon the international relations" of the UK. and that the "risk is of such magnitude to outweigh the interest of open public justice."
The trial began on April 18, 2007 in the Old Bailey court. Elaborate procedures were imposed to ensure secrecy, including asking barristers to remove their wigs when restricted information was being discussed.[6] Few details have been published in the press.
On May 10, 2007, Keogh was found guilty on two counts of making a "damaging disclosure" by revealing the memo and was sentenced to 6 months in jail. He was also ordered to pay £5000 in costs to the prosecution. O'Connor was sentenced to 3 months in jail.[7]
A second memo
Early reports suggested that the pair were actually being tried for leaking a different memo,[8] called "Iraq: The Medium Term", which was published by The Times in 2004.[9] The popular blog "BlairWatch" has suggested that this is the case and that the Al Jazeera bombing memo is actually unconnected with the case.[10][11] This theory has not been corroborated by any main stream media source, and in fact, UK reporting bans limit discussion of the case in print.
See also
References
- ↑ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4447100.stm and http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article1695513.ece
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
External links
- Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
<templatestyles src="Asbox/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  |
This article relating to law in the United Kingdom, or its constituent jurisdictions, is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
