This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/mar/12/lib-dem-peer-secret-courts

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Lib Dem peer attacks 'fairweather friends' who quit over secret courts Lib Dem peer attacks 'fairweather friends' who quit over secret courts
(7 months later)
A leading Liberal Democrat peer involved in the battle over the expansion of secret courts has condemned former party colleagues who resigned over the issue for being "fairweather friends".A leading Liberal Democrat peer involved in the battle over the expansion of secret courts has condemned former party colleagues who resigned over the issue for being "fairweather friends".
Lord Lester of Herne Hill, a key member of parliament's joint committee on human rights and drafter of government-defeating amendments, spoke out following a spate of political departures.Lord Lester of Herne Hill, a key member of parliament's joint committee on human rights and drafter of government-defeating amendments, spoke out following a spate of political departures.
Over the last three days Prof Philippe Sands QC, Dinah Rose QC and Jo Shaw, who formerly led the campaign inside the party, have quit the Liberal Democrats in protest at the coalition government's backing for the justice and security bill.Over the last three days Prof Philippe Sands QC, Dinah Rose QC and Jo Shaw, who formerly led the campaign inside the party, have quit the Liberal Democrats in protest at the coalition government's backing for the justice and security bill.
Opponents believe so-called closed material procedures – used in cases said to involve national security – deprive claimants of a fair trial by not allowing them to see all the evidence.Opponents believe so-called closed material procedures – used in cases said to involve national security – deprive claimants of a fair trial by not allowing them to see all the evidence.
The Liberal Democrat party conference has twice voted to reject the expansion of secret hearings into the main civil courts but an overwhelming majority of the party's MPs voted in support of the measure last week. The next stage in the political battle comes later this month when peers will re-examine the bill.The Liberal Democrat party conference has twice voted to reject the expansion of secret hearings into the main civil courts but an overwhelming majority of the party's MPs voted in support of the measure last week. The next stage in the political battle comes later this month when peers will re-examine the bill.
Lester said: "It's disappointing that some prominent Liberal Democrats have resigned and gone into the political wilderness because of their dislike of the justice and security bill and its support by the coalition government.Lester said: "It's disappointing that some prominent Liberal Democrats have resigned and gone into the political wilderness because of their dislike of the justice and security bill and its support by the coalition government.
"But instead of being fairweather friends they would have done well to support the work of the joint committee on human rights in building essential safeguards into the bill."But instead of being fairweather friends they would have done well to support the work of the joint committee on human rights in building essential safeguards into the bill.
"We Liberal Democrats have made vital changes and will press for more when the bill returns to the Lords on 26 March to achieve a fair balance between justice and security under the rule of law.""We Liberal Democrats have made vital changes and will press for more when the bill returns to the Lords on 26 March to achieve a fair balance between justice and security under the rule of law."
Lester says the outcome of the next vote is uncertain. In the last Lords debate on the bill in November, peers inflicted a series of defeats on the government by majorities of more than 100.Lester says the outcome of the next vote is uncertain. In the last Lords debate on the bill in November, peers inflicted a series of defeats on the government by majorities of more than 100.
The vote on 26 March, however, coincides with the Jewish religious festival of Passover when a number of peers will be absent, including some key opponents of the bill in its current form.The vote on 26 March, however, coincides with the Jewish religious festival of Passover when a number of peers will be absent, including some key opponents of the bill in its current form.
Some of the key safeguards put into the bill when peers defeated the government last year have since been removed during committee stage in the House of Commons. One of the main Lords amendments that disappeared was the so-called "Wiley balance" – a process of assessment that would have allowed judges to weigh the interests of national security against the wider public interest in the fair and open administration of justice.Some of the key safeguards put into the bill when peers defeated the government last year have since been removed during committee stage in the House of Commons. One of the main Lords amendments that disappeared was the so-called "Wiley balance" – a process of assessment that would have allowed judges to weigh the interests of national security against the wider public interest in the fair and open administration of justice.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.