Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 13 December 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
That was certainly the view of the Privy Counsellors on the review committee of the Privy Council of December 2003—colloquially known as the Newton committee—who are privy to all kinds of security information, because they have taken the Privy Council oath, to which the average citizen is not privy. They came to the conclusion that, had it been possible to use intercept evidence in terrorism cases, many more people would have been prosecuted and convicted.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 676 c1231-2
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Civil liberties Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Appeals Administration of justice Detainees Crimes against property Communication Electronic surveillance Evidence Intelligence services Judges Police Prosecutions Proscribed organisations Police custody Politics and government Scotland Terrorism Remand in custody Time limits Telephone tapping Cryptography Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 14:10:13 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286402
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286402
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286402