Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal
Abstract
The article examines how democratic nations, including Israel, Ireland, and the United States, balance national security secrecy with the rule of law in terrorism prosecutions. It highlights the challenges of using secret evidence in criminal trials while maintaining fair procedures, comparing the legal frameworks and practices of these countries. The analysis reveals common issues, such as the tension between protecting sensitive information and ensuring defendants' rights, and underscores the need for transparency and procedural integrity in terrorism cases.
Disciplines
Courts | Criminal Law | Criminal Procedure | Evidence | Law | Law Enforcement and Corrections | Military, War, and Peace
Recommended Citation
Peter Raven-Hansen,
Panel Report: National Security Secrecy in the Courts: A Comparative Perspective from Israel and Ireland,
5
Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J.
63
(2006).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cplpej/vol5/iss1/7
Included in
Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Evidence Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, Military, War, and Peace Commons