Appeal Court to study files in Iraq arms case
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.DOCUMENTS which reveal a relationship between the security services and a businessman convicted of illegally exporting military components to Iraq are to be submitted to the Court of Appeal.
Lord Taylor, the Lord Chief Justice, has asked to see the papers and other classified material in order to decide whether to grant four businessmen convicted of arms exporting offences leave to appeal.
The men received suspended prison sentences or fines at Reading Crown Court in February last year for breaching arms export guidelines by shipping parts for an artillery fuse assembly line to Iraq.
At a preliminary hearing yesterday, Lord Taylor, sitting with Mr Justice Henry and Mr Justice Blofeld, granted the men leave to pursue their appeals outside the normal 28-day time limit for appeals against conviction. During the original trial, the Home Secretary threatened to issue a Public Interest Immunity certificate to prevent some classified documents being used by the defence.
Paul Grecian, Colin Phillips, Stuart Blackledge, and Bryan Mason claim that the Government knew of their exports to Iraq, which occurred during the late 1980s after guidelines had been imposed banning such trade.
Lord Taylor has also asked to see documents released during the course of last November's Matrix Churchill trial which may have a bearing on this case.
Ordtech, the Reading-based company which employed the men, had no formal association with Matrix Churchill, but the circumstances of the two cases appear very similar. In both cases, one senior manager was briefing MI5 and MI6 on Iraqi orders. In the Matrix Churchill case, Alan Clark, the former Minister for Defence Procurement, admitted that the Government had prior knowledge and three company executives were acquitted. The Government was ordered by the court to submit documents which clearly identified the role that Paul Henderson, managing director, played in providing information to the British authorities.
The Ordtech businessmen were convicted before the Matrix Churchill case was heard. The Independent revealed last year that Mr Grecian, Ordtech's managing director, was reporting to the secret services on his dealings with Iraq.
His counsel, Peter Clark, asked the Court of Appeal yesterday to consider documents relating to these briefings. Andrew Collins QC, for Customs & Excise, confirmed that such documents did exist and added that they would be disclosed to the court.
Mr Clark said that Mr Grecian 'was giving information to MI5 and MI6 which was being passed on to the Foreign and Commonwealth office and, I now discover,being passed on to King Hussein of Jordan'.
The Ordtech defendants were charged with using Jordanian end- user certificates to disguise the ultimate destination of their exports from the United Kingdom.
Lord Taylor adjourned the preliminary hearing to enable Crown and defence counsel to agree which documents could be handed over directly to the defence and which should be submitted to the court for consideration.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments