The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas, has ruled to uphold reporting restrictions surrounding the trial of acquitted terror suspect Erol Incedal following an appeal from media agencies including The Guardian and the BBC. Mr Incedal's trial took place in conditions of unprecedented secrecy in 2014 and 2015. Following what Lord Thomas described as 'absolutely impermissible' representations from intelligence agencies, the Crown Prosecution Service decided prior to trial that it was in the interest of national security to prosecute Mr Incedal in secret.

Warning to M15 an M16

Though Lord Thomas upheld the decision to withhold a considerable portion of the trial evidence from journalists, he warned M15 and M16 not to push for courtroom secrecy in future by threatening to withhold evidence. Lord Thomas also invited the parliamentary intelligence and security committee to conduct its own investigation into the involvement of M15 and M16 in the prosecution of Mr Incedal. 'It is a significant, important and proper part of the duties of the services of the United Kingdom that they act in accordance with the law,' he said. For cases involving national security, Lord Thomas said that only the director of public prosecutions should hold sway over whether to prosecute and, if so, whether to conduct a trial in secret.

Incomplete picture

Mr Incedal was arrested after a memory card containing a bomb-making manual was discovered inside his mobile phone case. His trial was divided into three sections: open court proceedings that the media were free to attend, secret court proceedings from which reporters were barred, and semi-secret proceedings that journalists could attend, but not report on. After trial he was sentenced to 42 months imprisonment for possessing the manual. though in March a jury acquitted him of the more serious charge of planning acts of terrorism. The staggered picture of Mr Incedal's trial has left reporters in the unusual predicament of being able to report that a not guilty verdict was reached, but not being able to explain why. It is estimated that only 10 of almost 70 hours of evidence were ever heard by journalists. Sources: The Guardian; BBC