Secret courts condemned - by the very lawyers who would have to run them

Security services claim they cannot defend themselves in open court without disclosing sensitive intelligence

Medical negligence cases, inquests touching on national security or claims against police could all be held in secret

Last updated at 12:47 AM on 2nd March 2012

An elite group of lawyers who would oversee a highly controversial new system of ‘secret justice’ is warning it would leave Britain with more draconian rules than any other country in the world.

Dozens of special advocates – barristers and solicitors cleared to deal with cases involving issues of national security – have written to the Government urging a U-turn.

Ministers are understood to be ‘wobbling’ in the face of a wave of criticism over their plans to allow them to order that civil court cases or inquests must be held in private if they have the potential to ‘damage the public interest’.

The Daily Mail has revealed growing cross-party anger at proposals for a massive extension of so-called ‘closed material procedures’ in a wide range of legal cases.

The security services have been pushing for the move, arguing that they have been unable to defend themselves in open court for fear of disclosing sensitive intelligence.

But critics say the idea is more suited to despotic regimes such as Iran and North Korea, and will fatally undermine the ancient British principle that justice must be seen to be done.