Law, Terrorism and the Right to Know
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Reading
Department Name: Sch of Law
Abstract
Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.
People |
ORCID iD |
| Lawrence McNamara (Principal Investigator / Fellow) |
Publications
McNamara L
(2010)
Counter-terrorism and Beyond: The Culture of Law and Justice After 9/11
McNamara L
(2012)
Book review: Jacqui Ewart, Haneef: A Question of Character
in Journal of Sociology
McNamara L
(2013)
The New Commonwealth Model of Constitutionalism: Theory and Practice, Stephen Gardbaum [Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013, 270pp, 978-1-107-40199-0, $39.99 (p/bk)]
in International and Comparative Law Quarterly
McNamara L
(2015)
Secrecy, Law and Society
McNamara, L
(2011)
Book review: K Gelber, Speech Matters: Getting Free Speech Right, UQ Press, 2011
in Gazette of Law and Journalism
| Description | The findings have been documented in outputs expressly aimed at scholarly audiences and in outputs aimed at scholarly and other audiences. A list of outputs accompanies the impact report that was lodged. Scientific impact is primarily located in the major publications. (1) The way information relating to terrorism and security is controlled and managed by the state, and accessed by the media; (2) Methodology in socio-legal studies and security research. Key outputs include: • A book chapter (2010) and journal article (2010) examining legal frameworks for obtaining journalistic material, focusing especially on production orders and protections at investigatory stages. • A book chapter (2014) that examined journalists' experience of reporting on terrorism matters. • Numerous conference and seminar papers to scholarly audiences. • A conference and summary resource paper as part of a research training event for PhD students from across the UK and across disciplines. • A further major piece is in preparation for submission to a peer-reviewed journal (Legal Studies), which will examine lawyer, government and policing perspectives, along with methodology. A second will examine disclosure obligations (Criminal Law Review). (3) Judicial perspectives on terrorism cases. Key outputs include: • A conference paper and publication in proceedings (2012). • A further major piece is in preparation for submission to a peer-reviewed journal (Modern Law Review). (4) The implications of extending regimes of closed legal proceedings. Key outputs include: • A list of cases likely to be subject to closed proceedings (2012) • Written and oral evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights (2012) • Response to the Cabinet Office consultation on the Justice and Security Green Paper (2012) • A further major piece is in preparation for submission to a peer-reviewed journal (Public Law). This will carry the research forward beyond what was envisaged at the outset of the project. |
| Exploitation Route | The findings might be taken forward by government and parliament in the formulation of legislation and policy relating to transparency and accountability in terrorism and security matters. They might be taken forward by the courts and archives with regard to the ways that closed judgments are reviewed over time. They might be taken forward by the legal profession in arguments before the courts about fair trials and what degree of openness is required to ensure fairness and open justice. |
| Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice,Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections,Security and Diplomacy |
| Description | The scientific impacts of the project centred around contributions to knowledge in four main areas. (1) The way information relating to terrorism and security is controlled and managed by the state, and the way it is accessed by the media. The research analysed the legal framework in the UK and undertook comparative analysis (notably with Australia), and gathered original data which sheds light on the practices of information control, management and access. It appears to be the only work which has collected original interview-based data. Among areas of note, it provided empirical evidence relating to the effects on the media of laws (specifically Terrorism Act 2000, s 38B) that criminalise the failure to disclose information about terrorism. (2) Methodology in socio-legal studies and security research. The project makes a modest but meaningful contribution to methodology with regard to the difficulties in undertaking security research. It offers insights into when one cannot know if interviewees are telling the truth or are able to tell the truth. The literature does not currently address this difficulty, even in the major works on methodology in socio-legal studies or security research. (3) Judicial perspectives on terrorism cases. Overcoming significant access hurdles, the project gathered for the first time accounts from the judiciary of their experience of terrorism cases. This is a major achievement given the long British involvement in Northern Ireland and the now fairly extensive number of prosecutions on the mainland since 2005. Using freedom of information requests, the project also gathered evidence that documents judicial participation in academic research generally. (4) The implications of extending regimes of closed legal proceedings. The project examined, among other matters, how adverse effects in the long term may be mitigated by systems for subsequent review of closed judgments. Economic and societal impact included: First, it helped shape the Justice and Security Act 2013 (JSA) that now permits the use of closed material proceedings in civil actions. The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) report quoted my evidence in detail, describing 'the impact on media freedom and democratic accountability' as 'the missing issue' in the Green Paper. All my recommendations were proposed as amendments by Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and crossbench peers, and several in the Commons Public Bill Committee. I was asked to draft some amendments and was expressly acknowledged by name in parliamentary debates. Of course, not all succeeded, but some did (eg, government must now report annually to parliament on the use of closed proceedings). A major recommendation the JCHR adopted was that open justice should be a criterion when deciding whether closed proceedings should be used. Amendments saw it added to the Bill and then replaced by an alternative ("effective administration of justice"), with the Lords vote on the open justice amendment narrowly defeated 174-158 votes. However, the arguments are in the record and will be points of reference when the law is interpreted, applied and reviewed. Secondly, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) guidelines for prosecution of cases affecting the media appear to have been influenced by my work. The CPS consulted on the interim guidelines. I responded, arguing that the chilling effect of prosecutions should be considered. The interim guidelines were changed with the CPS reporting only two respondents raised that issue. Thirdly, there is reason to think that my work had some influence on media approaches to the JSA and issues relating to closed judgments. My submissions on the JSA attracted interest from media lawyers with one senior lawyer describing them as 'a tour de force'. Subsequent to the JSA, one of my arguments for amendment to the Bill - that there be a system for reviewing closed judgments to ensure they could be open when secrecy was no longer required - was argued by a media organisation in a case before the High Court R (Evans) v Sec of State for Defence [2013] EWHC 3068 (Admin). After the project ended impact continued, including: Fourthly, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal cited my research in a 2015 decision that changed the law in that country when it held that all court records are public documents open to public scrutiny and that any departure from that principle is an exception that must be justified: City of Cape Town v South African National Roads Authority Ltd & others [2015] ZASCA 58 (30 March 2015). Fifth, by 2015 the effects of the legislative provision that requires the government to report annually to parliament on the use of closed proceedings (see above, paragraph beginning, "First ...") were beginning to be felt. The government's first annual report in 2014 had very little detail in it and there were omissions. Following an analysis I did and recommendations I made after that report, the Ministry of Justice wrote to me indicating my recommendations would be considered with a view to providing further information pursuant to the legislation. The government's second annual report in 2015 provided much more information. (Note: the analyses were done after the completion of the award project, but the impact - the provision of further information - follows from the inclusion of the legislative requirement that arose in the award project.) Sixth, in 2016 the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) addressed the issue which I had identified in the 2013 legislative process, and which (explained above) was argued at the High Court in 2015: that there should be a system for reviewing closed judgments to ensure they could be open when secrecy was no longer required. In Parliament in 2013 the Minister agreed the point had force but it could not be resolved at that time. The Court of Appeal in The Guardian v R and Incedal [2016] EWCA Crim 11 (para 80) directed the Court's Registrar to form a working party that would consider issues including that one. There is no specific reference to my work but the link appears to tie back clearly, based on what I understand was argument by the lawyers. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2012 |
| Sector | Government, Democracy and Justice,Security and Diplomacy |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| Description | Change to government reporting practices on the use of closed proceedings in courts |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Impact | During the award project one impact was that under the Justice and Security Act 2013 the government were to be to report annually to parliament on the use of closed proceedings. By 2015 the effects of that legislative provision were beginning to be felt. The government's first annual report in 2014 had very little detail in it and there were omissions. Following an analysis I did and recommendations I made after that report, the Ministry of Justice wrote to me (10/10/2014) indicating my recommendations would be considered with a view to providing further information pursuant to the legislation. The government's second annual report in 2015 provided much more information. (Note: the analyses were done after the completion of the award project, but the impact - the provision of further information - follows from the inclusion of the legislative requirement that arose in the award project.) |
| URL | http://binghamcentre.biicl.org/documents/442_cmps_the_first_year_-_bingham_centre_paper_2014-03__sup... |
| Description | Citation in South African Supreme Court of Appeals case - influencing decision and law |
| Geographic Reach | Africa |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Impact | The South African Supreme Court of Appeal decision changed the existing law in that country when it held that all court records are public documents open to public scrutiny and that any departure from that principle is an exception that must be justified. |
| URL | http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/judgments/sca_2015/sca2015-058.pdf |
| Description | Citation in parliament - amendments to Justice and Security Bill |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Impact | Helped shape the Justice and Security Act 2013 (JSA) that now permits the use of closed material proceedings in civil actions. The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) report quoted my evidence in detail, describing 'the impact on media freedom and democratic accountability' as 'the missing issue' in the Green Paper. All my recommendations were proposed as amendments by Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and crossbench peers, and several in the Commons Public Bill Committee. I was asked to draft some amendments and was expressly acknowledged by name in parliamentary debates. Of course, not all succeeded, but some did (eg, government must now report annually to parliament on the use of closed proceedings). A major recommendation the JCHR adopted was that open justice should be a criterion when deciding whether closed proceedings should be used. Amendments saw it added to the Bill and then replaced by an alternative ("effective administration of justice"), with the Lords vote on the open justice amendment narrowly defeated 174-158 votes. However, the arguments are in the record and will be points of reference when the law is interpreted, applied and reviewed. |
| Description | Media approaches to secrecy in court proceedings |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | There is reason to think that my work had some influence on media approaches to the Justice and Security Act (JSA) and issues relating to closed judgments. My submissions and evidence on the JSA attracted interest from media lawyers. Subsequent to the JSA, one of my arguments for amendment to the Bill - that there be a system for reviewing closed judgments to ensure they could be open when secrecy was no longer required - was argued by a media organisation in a case before the High Court R (Evans) v Sec of State for Defence [2013] EWHC 3068 (Admin). While the argument did not succeed, it has given certainty to the issue, establishing that the issue is one that cannot be decided by the courts and must be resolved by parliament. Of note, in parliamentary debates on the JSA the government acknowledged it was a matter that would need to be addressed in future. |
| URL | http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/3068.html |
| Description | PhD and ECR training: Terrorism and Security Research in the UK: Using and Understanding Legal Resources |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Influenced training of practitioners or researchers |
| URL | http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/LTRK/LTRK_Notes_for_Researchers_2012-06-17.pdf |
| Description | Prosecution guidelines on cases involving the media |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | My arguments in a submission to the consultation by the Crown Prosecution Service on prosecution in cases involving the media included recommending that the guidelines should be amended to say that the chilling effect of prosecutions should be considered in decisions about whether to prosecute. The report on the consultation made changes to the Interim Guidelines. It did not attribute changes to specific submissions but two points in my submission were taken up as revisions to the Interim Guidelines and included in the final Guidelines. In one case - the addition of taking account of a chilling effect - I was one of only two respondents that made this recommendation. |
| Description | Cross-Cutting Grants |
| Amount | £25,000 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | 9518 |
| Organisation | Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 01/2017 |
| End | 12/2017 |
| Description | Briefings for parliamentarians - Justice and Security Bill |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Numerous briefings written and submitted to MPs and peers in the course of debates surrounding Justice and Security Bill. These referred back to on-the-record evidence presented to parliamentary committees. Included drafting legislative amendments. Evidence and briefings cited on several occasions in parliamentary and committee debates and legislative amendments proposed in House of Commons and House of Lords, including with express acknowledgment of my input. All eight of my recommendations for amendments were included as proposed amendments at the Committee stage, having been proposed variously by Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and crossbench peers: Second marshalled list of amendments, 9 July 2012, eg, Amendments 39(4)(b)(ii), 39(4)(b)(iv), 67B, 67C, 69ZA, 88. I was expressly acknowledged as the author of some of these: Hansard, HL Deb, 17 July 2012, vol 739, cols 206-211. Legislation ultimately reflected my evidence and recommendations, though not all proposed changes to the Bill were passed by Parliament. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012,2013 |
| URL | http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldhansrd/text/120717-0003.htm#12071795000455 |
| Description | Newspaper op-ed piece: 'Lord Neuberger's seven principles empower judges to speak' |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Publication in The Guardian. Piece discussing a speech given by Lord Neuberger concerning the issue of if, when and how the judiciary should engage with the public outside of court proceedings. Prompted comments online. Received emails. Unable to track impact, though aware that it was read by lawyers and some judges. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/mar/16/neuberger-principles-empower-judges |
| Description | Newspaper op-ed piece: 'Security trumps justice, again' |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Publication in the Guardian. Piece provided analysis of proposed legislation. As part of a broader stream of writing, informed debate and (ultimately) legislation. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/may/16/secrecy-closed-material-procedures |
| Description | Newspaper op-ed piece: How will we even know a closed judgment exists? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Piece in The Guardian. Prompted comments and clearly had good readership. Discussions with those working in the field indicate it informed some debate. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/apr/04/closed-material-procedures-media |
| Description | Newspaper op-ed piece: Reporting local terrorism: the media and the state' |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Publication in The Canberra Times Unable to track impact, though received emails in response. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://business.highbeam.com/437587/article-1G1-205544615/reporting-local-terrorism-media-and-state |
| Description | Online piece: Secret Trials: Secrecy at the Expense of Justice |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Publication of analysis of prosecution request to hold a criminal trial in secret. Publication within 48 hours of the request becoming public. First publication on leadoing media law blog Inforrm (International Forum for Responsible Media. Sparked requests to republish on other major online outlets Media Lawyer (Press Association service in the UK) and Gazette of Law and Journalism (in Australia). Republication on other major online outlets Media Lawyer (Press Association service in the UK) and Gazette of Law and Journalism (in Australia), with international attention to a UK issue. Comments and reception of this and subsequent pieces as the case developed indicated audience had changed views. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/secret-trials-secrecy-at-the-expense-of-justice-lawrence-mcn... |
| Description | Online piece: How open will this newly opened justice be? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Analysis of reactions to the Court of Appeal decision to refuse to allow a prosecution request to hold a terrorism trial in secret. Publication on major media law blog, International Forum for Responsible Media. Sparked requests to republish. Subsequently re-published by Legal Week, a professional magazine aimed at lawyers in the UK. In combination with two other pieces, comments indicated that audience views had been changed. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2014/06/14/how-open-will-this-newly-opened-justice-be-lawrence-mcnamara... |
| Description | Online piece: Secret Trials: A Little Transparency, A Lot to Worry About |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Analysis of preliminary judgment by Court of Appeal in decision about whether to allow a prosecution request to hold a criminal trial in secret. Publication on major UK legal blog, UK Human Rights Blog. Sparked requests to republish. Subsequently re-published by three major blogs/outlets: (1) International Forum for Responsible Media (a major media law blog); (2) Media Lawyer (the Press Association service for the UK); (3) Gazette of Law and Journalism (in Australia). In combination with two other pieces, comments indicated that audience views had been changed. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/06/12/secret-trials-a-little-transparency-a-lot-to-worry-about-law... |
| Description | Online piece: The rise of the secret trial: Closed material procedures one year on |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | My earlier work had strongly influenced the inclusion in the Justice and Security Act of a requirement that the Secretary of State report to Parliament annually on the use of closed material procedures. This piece, based on a working paper, analysed the accuracy and adequacy of the Secretary of State's report, and attempted to identify the cases which were its subject. The piece attracted attention from government, parliament and the profession, with indications that the analysis may influence the approach to be taken in future reports. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/08/05/the-rise-of-the-secret-trial-closed-material-procedures-one-... |
| Description | Online publication: The Justice and Security Bill will make secrecy the norm |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Publication on Index on Censorship (major freedom of expression NGO) online forum No impacts tracked to this specific publication but part of a broader stream of writing that influence debate and legislation. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/2012/06/01/justice-security-bill/ |
| Description | Opinion piece for debating competition resources |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Resource piece, "Civil Liberties, Open Justice and Protection from Terrorism" for RCUK Global Uncertainties Schools Network / Institute of Ideas Debating Matters Competition, 4 March 2010. Piece used in debating competition as a resource. Unable to track impact. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2010 |
| URL | http://www.socialscienceforschools.org.uk/images/Terrorism_tcm20-19676.pdf |
| Description | Oral evidence (Joint Committee on Human Rights, Inquiry into Green Paper on Justice and Security) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Oral evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights' inquiry into the human rights implications of the Government's Green Paper on Justice and Security. My evidence was cited in some depth in the report, Twenty-fourth Report of Session 2010-12, see esp Ch 6 'The Impact on Media Freedom and Democratic Accountability', with some of my recommendations being expressly adopted (eg, para 216). There was media coverage of this. Subsequently, and as part of a range of my engagement, legislative amendments were proposed in parliament, a case was argued before the courts. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/Justice_and_Security_corrected_oral... |
| Description | Panellist: Global Uncertainties Leadership Fellows Annual Meeting |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Invited panellist at the GU Leadership Fellows meeting for the session, 'Maximising the impact of your research'. No identifiable direct impact. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Poster presentation (Society of Legal Scholars conference, 13 Sep 2012) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Presentation sparked discussion and questions. Not aware of any impact from this specific presentation. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Presentation: From Internment to TPIMs: The Rule of Law and State Responses to Violence |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Presented a paper at the launch of a project and exhibition funded by the AHRC Cultural Engagement Fund: Enemies of the State: The Easter Rising and Irish Detainees in Reading Prison, University of Reading and Berkshire Record Office, 30 April 2013. The paper drew together contemporary and historical detention issues. The launch was full and the exhibition was well attended. Interesting questions asked by audience. No further impact was traceable. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/enemies-of-the-state/ |
| Description | Presentation: The expansion of secrecy in civil proceedings: Reviewing the UK experience |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Paper to Australian audience of lawyers and academics at a seminar for the Public Law and Policy Research Unit at the University of Adelaide, Australia. Sparked interesting comparative questions in Q&A after presentation and subsequent discussions. No identifiable impacts. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://blogs.adelaide.edu.au/public-law-rc/2014/10/15/public-law-and-policy-research-unit-seminar-se... |
| Description | Response to Cabinet Office consultation on Justice and Security Green paper |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission, jointly authored with S McIntosh, published by Cabinet Office. The Law, Terrorism and the Right to Know web site was subsequently included on the Cabinet Office consultation site as a source for information about the Green Paper and the issues. It is one of only two sites listed; the other is a parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/justiceandsecurity/responses-to-the-consultation |
| Description | Seminars to professional audiences - Centre for Media and Communications Law |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The presentation, 'Secrecy, Security and the Media: How Counter-Terrorism Laws affect Media Reporting in Australia and the UK' was delivered to professional audiences in Sydney and Melbourne, in Australia. The papers sparked questions and discussion, attracting particular attention from the Australian Press Council. The presentation received media coverage in the leading daily broadsheet, the Sydney Morning Herald on 4 June 2010. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2010 |
| URL | http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/apps/viewDocument.ac;jsessionid=D3D2D993424B050CB1B75933A75D865F?sy=... |
| Description | Submission (Comments on Broadcasting of Open Hearings) to Detainee Inquiry. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission made regarding the Inquiry's consultation on whether to broadcast open hearings. No impact as Inquiry disbanded shortly after submission due to its conflict with other investigations. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.detaineeinquiry.org.uk/2013/12/statement-by-the-inquiry-december-2013/ |
| Description | Submission to Australian Attorney General's Department, National Security Legislation Discussion Paper, 24 September 2009. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission made to Attorney-General's department. Not aware of any impact. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2009 |
| Description | Submission to Australian Law Reform Commission, Review of Secrecy Laws (Discussion Paper 74), 5 August 2009 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission made to Law Reform Commission inquiry. This submission was cited nine times and quoted twice in the Commission's ALRC Report 112: Secrecy Laws and Open Government in Australia (2010). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2009 |
| URL | http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/report-112 |
| Description | Submission to Australian Senate Legal & Constitutional Affairs Committee Inquiry into the provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Laws Reform Bill 2009, Submission 12, 26 August 2009 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission made to parliamentary committee. Not aware of any impact. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2009 |
| Description | Submission to Crown Prosecution Service consultation on Interim Guidelines for Prosecutors in Cases Involving the Media |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Written submission on CPS consultation. My arguments in the submission included recommending that the guidelines should be amended to say that the chilling effect of prosecutions should be considered in decisions about whether to prosecute. The report on the consultation made changes to the Interim Guidelines. It did not attribute changes to specific submissions but two points in my submission were taken up as revisions to the Interim Guidelines and included in the final Guidelines. In one case - the addition of taking account of a chilling effect - I was one of only two respondents that made this recommendation. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.cps.gov.uk/consultations/mg_index.html |
| Description | Summary piece for ESRC 'Britain in 2011' |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Piece published in "Britain in 2011" Not aware of impact from this specific piece. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2010 |
| URL | http://www.esrc.ac.uk/news-and-events/press-releases/8054/britain-in-2011-the-state-of-the-nation.as... |
| Description | Television news appearance (Channel 4) - Justice and Security Bill |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Appearance on Channel 4 national news, main 7pm bulletin. Interview by Jon Snow, with Ch 4 international correspondent Lindsay Hilsum. No specific impact traceable to this appearance, but part of a broader stream of engagement that influenced debate and legislation. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXbvXT3M-ws |
| Description | Written evidence (JCHR) Legislative Scrutiny of Justice and Security Bill |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Written submission on a later stage (legislative scrutiny) of the Joint Committee on Human Rights consideration of the Justice and Security Bill. Not aware of any specific impacts that resulted from this submission. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/McNamara_Justice_and_Security_Bill.... |
| Description | Written evidence (Joint Committee on Human Rights' Inquiry into Green Paper on Justice and Security) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Invited to give oral evidence. See further impacts below. My evidence was cited in some depth in the report, Twenty-fourth Report of Session 2010-12, see esp Ch 6 'The Impact on Media Freedom and Democratic Accountability', with some of my recommendations being expressly adopted (eg, para 216). There was media coverage of this. Subsequently, and as part of a range of my engagement, legislative amendments were proposed in parliament, a case was argued before the courts. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/Written%20Evidence%20Volume%20v6.pd... |
| Description | Written evidence - supplementary (Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry into Green Paper on Justice and Security) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | See impacts below. My evidence was cited in some depth in the report, Twenty-fourth Report of Session 2010-12, see esp Ch 6 'The Impact on Media Freedom and Democratic Accountability', with some of my recommendations being expressly adopted (eg, para 216). There was media coverage of this. Subsequently, and as part of a range of my engagement, legislative amendments were proposed in parliament, a case was argued before the courts. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/Written%20Evidence%20Volume%20v6.pd... |
| Description | Written evidence to Public Bill Committee, House of Commons (Justice and Security Bill) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Written memo published in parliamentary proceedings. Committee debates referred to my evidence and legislative amendments were proposed based on it. Cited in parliamentary committee debates and legislative amendments proposed, including with express acknowledgment of my input. Legislation ultimately reflected my evidence and recommendations, though not all proposed changes to the Bill were passed by Parliament. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmpublic/justiceandsecurity/memo/m1.htm |