Special tribunals which would consider whether groups should be banned under proposed national security laws may not have to follow the usual rules applying to the courts, the solicitor-general said yesterday.
Robert Allcock told a public forum different procedures might be needed because the tribunals would be dealing with sensitive issues. The forum, at the Foreign Correspondents' Club, was organised by the jurists' lobby group Justice. 'The basic thinking is that with issues relating to national security there may be a case for having procedures which do not necessarily follow the general procedures in courts of law,' Mr Allcock said. He cited the need to protect confidential material, such as that relating to intelligence.
'I think it should be recognised that these types of cases do throw up problems which the normal rules of the courts may not deal with appropriately.'
The banning of organisations on the grounds of national security is dealt with in a consultation paper released last month by the government that proposes controversial anti-subversion legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law.
Appeals against a ban imposed by the secretary for security would first be considered by an independent tribunal.
Under the proposals, the role of the courts would be restricted to considering points of law.