Print document
 53 of 94 
That I would not dispute. But, what your Lordship has to rule on is the evidence as it stands at
present, whether that evidence should be heard in camera. My Lord, that is why I say that the
evidence that we read in the statements of Mrs. C and Mr. Gordievsky do not come within the
criteria of section 8 (4). I do not want to keep on repeating the proposition.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: No, I have got your general point.
MR. TANSEY: If the Solicitor General does come up with certain additional approaches if your
Lordship would allow me to reply.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: Yes, all right.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: Mr. Solicitor, I am a little troubled by this. It does seem to me that what
Mr. Gordievsky has disclosed is now old hat. I am a little puzzled to know really - I can see
something might come out in cross-examination; I cannot see how what is going to come out in the
evidence-in-chief is going to be prejudicial may I say. I put Mr. E in a slightly different category
because I can see that his identity might prejudice him. He, after all, on the face of it, whether or not
he can ever be described as acting as an agent for a foreign power, having read his statement, I am
not going to make up my mind about but it is certain that at the same time he was informing the
American Security Services, in doing that it is namely to disclose - I know Mr. Tansey has not yet
dealt with - but I can see that you might be open to some difficulties if not dangers, but I am little
troubled by Mrs. C and Mr. Gordievsky in-chief.
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL: Mrs. C’s evidence, as it stands on paper, in my submission
demonstrates that she is a highly qualified expert in the field of Soviet tradecraft. So it is how she has
acquired ----
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: It is very general. Page one is extraordinarily general. Page one does
not - there does not seem to be anything much in page one that is her introduction really.
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL: It is not, with respect, because the true chronology required, if one
can go to the later statement that she made at one 181 and 278 ----
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL: 181 and 186. 186 is the first one in chronological order.
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL: This deals with her background in the Security Services, when she
joined, which section she worked in and how she has been involved in debriefing a number of Soviet
defectors, her part in researching and preparing a number of Official Secret Act prosecutions, head
of a particular department and between 1990 and 1993 returning to the department that she
originally joined, which was the one that deals with studying the operational methods and techniques
of intelligence services of countries hostile to the UK.
If that does not show, in my submission, the risk of laying bare the whole of this country’s Security
Service effort in trying to acquire knowledge of and then devise methods to counter hostile
intelligence it is difficult to think what does. It is fairly and squarely on that point. She goes on at the
foot of page 6: