"I am reluctant to go further than that unless the court requires I do." It is not appropriate to give further reasons. Mr Ellison refused to be drawn, apart from saying: "You will understand that consideration had been given to what is appropriate for the Crown to say. He pointed out that eight months had elapsed between Ms Gun's arrest and the decision to charge her, and another three months since she was actually charged. "If a decision was made last Friday, why was it not communicated to the defence and if it had not been taken last Friday, what has happened in between?" ![]() Mr Emmerson told the judge the first issue requiring examination was "whether, by whom and why the decision was leaked to The Guardian six days before it was communicated to the defence. There are two issues requiring serious examination." "A call was received yesterday afternoon from the CPS indicating a decision had been taken to drop the case. "Yesterday, on February 24, the defence served on the prosecution a document setting out her defence and making requests for disclosure certain diplomatic communications and certain items of Government legal advice. Those who instruct me rang the CPS and were told it was not possible to confirm that was the Crown's intention. ![]() "Apparently, it was sourced to sources close to the prosecution. Last Friday, an article appeared in The Guardian newspaper indicating that the case was to be dropped today. Her first appearance was in magistrates' court on November 27. He went on: "On November 13 she was charged. "After that, eight months passed during which consideration was given by the Attorney General whether she should be prosecuted." He said: "Katharine Gun was arrested on March 5 last year following the publication in The Observer newspaper of the contents of an e-mail which she admits having disclosed, having received it through her employment at GCHQ. Ms Gun's solicitor John Welch added: "It is quite appalling that a whistleblower who had acted in good conscience should have been threatened with two years' imprisonment for exposing that the American Government had asked our Government to do something which was illegal and would have undermined the deliberations of the United Nations."īut the Crown refused to give a fuller explanation of why it had changed its mind – in spite of being continually pressed to do so in court by Ms Gun's barrister.Īfter the judge formally entered a not guilty verdict, Mr Emmerson said he was "bound to raise issues about the way this case has been conducted by the Crown Prosecution Service. "But I would like to know why," she added. She had no idea why the charge had been dropped. She left court today saying "I have no regrets and I would do it again." ![]() Ms Gun said at the time: "Any disclosures were justified because they exposed illegality by the US, who tried to subvert our security services." She had been accused of disclosing a request allegedly from a US National Security Agency official requesting help from British intelligence to tap the telephones of UN Security Council delegates in the run-up to the war in Iraq. In November she was charged under the Official Secrets Act, accused of disclosing security and intelligence information.īut another three months passed before the CPS finally informed her lawyers yesterday that the case was to be dropped. She was arrested in March last year and in June she was sacked from her job as a translator at the Government Communications Headquarters, the security service's main monitoring centre. Ms Gun, 29, of Moor End Road, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, had been accused of leaking a memo on an alleged American "dirty tricks" campaign. Her counsel, Ben Emmerson QC, said: "Katharine Gun is entitled to know - and, perhaps more importantly, the public is entitled to know."
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |