Citizenship and Immigration committee  We don't actually have anything quite like security certificates in Britain. But if the Secretary of State decides that someone ought to be deported because they are a threat to security, then the Secretary of State has the power of arrest and detention pending deportation. That, in fact, is what at the moment SIAC is mainly dealing with under its current caseload.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Right, we're dealing with your last question first. In none of the cases that I was involved in did SIAC have before it anything more than about probably 10% of the evidence that was available to the security services. That came out because we sought discovery from time to time from them within the closed sessions.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Let me give you an example, and I've got to be a little bit careful about what I say. Intercept evidence is obviously going to be based upon accurate translations of what was actually said. Before SIAC a summary would be used, without the actual words. Sometimes the words were there, but not always.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Well, obviously if you're prepared to pour resources into it, you can do that. It's also a problem with unused material in criminal trial cases. It's often a question of time and resources.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Well, yes, that actually brings me back to the first question you asked me. I think the fundamental change after 9/11 was bringing in indefinite detention. The whole focus of SIAC, in fact all the SIAC cases practically, not all of them but the vast majority, were detention cases.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No, no. That's fine.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No. There was no attempt to have indefinite detention. After the case the government refused to release the detainees, even though they must have known that holding them was contrary to the European convention on human rights, which is incorporated as part of our law.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There is obviously going to be some evidence that may be sensitive, for example the identity of informers and so forth, but with a lot of the intercept evidence, I can't see why it has to be withheld. You only have to read the latest novel, or whatever it is, and you can find out what the latest technical advances are in covert surveillance.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There are certain parts of that question that raise things that I'm not allowed to discuss publicly, but I don't think there is any—I'm sure there is an ongoing review. Basically, what I've said is that before SIAC, what one had were assessments made by intelligence officers who were giving evidence.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No. There's no training for people who are appointed as special advocates. You learn on the job. Most of us were all very experienced lawyers, either in the immigration field or in trial work, which I've always done. But there was no kind of training whatsoever. The only observation I would make is that the intelligence services having to justify assessments that they made before trained lawyers was probably a very big cultural shock.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I can't, no. I can probably understand it in French.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I was aware that you had, but I've never seen a copy of it. I certainly totally agree that the criminal courts are the preferred method of dealing with people. The problem, which is a problem that I think any police force has, is turning intelligence information into evidence that's admissible in a court of law.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes, there is. It's been reviewed by a parliamentary committee, which made certain recommendations, but they didn't go very far. And I don't think that any of the reviewing bodies have really dealt with the fundamental fault that seems to exist, and that is that the moment the special advocates get the closed material, there is no kind of communication about the case.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  No. The special committee heard a lot of evidence, including evidence I gave to it, and they produced a report, which really spoke about the fact that once you've seen the confidential material, the special advocate can't take instructions from the appellant or the appellant's counsel.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Certainly.