
MI6 tried to intervene independent court by stopping judge seeing legal papers - LinuxBender
https://www.theregister.com/2020/07/28/mi6_investigatory_powers_tribunal_interference/
======
tomalpha
MI6 asked the court service to not give certain papers to the judge. The court
service said “no”, and promptly informed an MI6 oversight body.

It’s not great that they asked, but the system does appear to have worked as
it should.

Or am I missing something?

~~~
simion314
From my reading it seems they did not have the prerogatives or rights to ask
this, it was an illegal demands but the apology was enough.

~~~
matthewheath
There was nothing illegal about their request. They shouldn't have done it,
but they didn't break any laws in doing so.

~~~
foolmeonce
It not being illegal is not a good thing. Apparently evidence tampering is
cool in the UK?

~~~
matthewheath
I never said it was a good thing — of course evidence tampering is utterly
unacceptable. The systems here simply hew closely to expected standards of
behaviour from institutions, and in any event there are a range of mechanisms
to address the behaviour without needing to criminalise it.

------
DisjointedHunt
The scary consequences of overbearing "Classified" status assigned to
information that human beings are embarrassed by is likely the single biggest
omission to the public record thus denying the public the ability to form
political opinions fairly.

~~~
blue52
Well said. It's scary how many thing that get classified that shouldn't be.

~~~
londons_explore
It's crafty mixing of real classified information with embarrassing
information...

"The address of our safehouse is classified, but all the letters we send
eachother have the address on the top, therefore all these letters are
classified."

------
ncmncm
Parody court agrees with parody inspector on parody rules.

Very real threat temporarily averted. Next time it will be conducted more
subtly but no less mistakably, so the parody court won't hear about it or what
it was meant to cover up, and all will be well.

------
heraclius
According to Wikipedia, the IPT upheld ten of 1468 complaints from 2000 to
2012. High standards of conduct, judicial probity and intellectual excellence
do not inevitably lead to justice—we know this from, e.g., Singapore—and,
whilst we cannot determine much sans access to classified data and rulings,
this seems to be one of those cases. The problem with the IPT is probably not
this sort of exploit, but rather its overall structure and the statutory
framework within which it operates.

------
pjc50
Disappointed but not surprised. See also: Matrix-Churchill.

