Government lawyers have asked the High Court to throw
out a ruling to publish
Gateway reviews into the feasibility and progress of
thegovernment's
ID cards projecton the basis of a piece of
319-year-old English legislation.
The hearing is seen as a test case on whether Gateway reviews -
independent assessments of risky IT and other projects at critical
stages - should be subject to public scrutiny.
If the judge accepts the case put forward by government lawyers,
and he has indicated that he may,
Gateway reviews on ID cards and other major schemes will remain
secret for at least another six months, and possibly much
longer.
The government is using the 1689 Bill of Rights, which
establishes the principle that parliamentary proceedings cannot be
questioned by the courts, as one central argument in its legal
battle to prevent Gateway reviews becoming public. The case will
decide whether a ruling by the Information Tribunal that early
Gateway reviews on ID cards be published should stand.
Computer Weekly has campaigned for years for Gateway reviews to
be made available to the public. The information commissioner and
the Information Tribunal have ruled that early Gateway reviews on
ID cards be published.
"Disclosure is likely to enhance public debate of issues such as
the programme's feasibility and how [the ID card scheme] is being
managed. It would also allow the identification of project risks
and practical concerns," said information commissioner Richard
Thomas.
But the Treasury's Office of Government Commerce (OGC), which
runs the Gateway scheme, wants reviews kept secret. It says that
those interviewed as part of the reviews may not be frank and open
if reports are to be disclosed.
The OGC's barrister Jonathan Swift asked the judge, Stanley
Burnton, to reject the ruling that the reviews should be made
public in the High Court last week.
Swift said Parliamentary Privilege granted by the 1689 Bill of
Rights stopped the courts from questioning or examining
parliamentary proceedings.
This could undermine the Information Tribunal's ruling, which
relied heavily on an investigation into Gateway reviews by the
Commons Work and Pensions Committee.
Swift, whose arguments about the Bill of Rights were backed by
Martin Chamberlain, a lawyer representing the speaker of the House
of Commons, suggested the tribunal might have been wrong to quote
extensively from the committee's report.
The judge appeared to support some of the arguments put by Swift
and Chamberlain. If he throws out the tribunal's ruling, it would
mean that the tribunal would have to reconsider whether Gateway
reviews on ID cards should be published.
ID card relaunch widely criticised >>
computerweekly.com/blog/tony_collins >>