‘The Official Secrets Act is not there to protect secrets, it is there to protect officials!’, the archetypal mandarin Sir Humphrey Appleby told his ministerial dupe Jim Hacker in the timeless sitcom Yes Minister.

One recalled Sir Humphrey’s cynicism upon the publication of the Coroners and Justice Bill. Not one to take no for an answer, Jack Straw is using the legislation to reintroduce proposals which ministers had previously scrapped to hold inquests in secret and without a jury in cases involving national security.

It is true that the revised measures come with judicial safeguards. But the problem the justice secretary faces in getting this through Parliament is one of simple credibility. In short, this authoritarian government has carried out such a wide-ranging and unremitting assault on civil liberties and fundamental democratic rights that it has forfeited the right to be seen as acting in good faith.

Think of how ‘anti-terrorist’ laws have been abused through so-called ‘function creep’, and apply the lessons to the handling of the de Menezes inquest, and the government’s acute discomfort in cases where servicemen died because they were not given proper equipment. Is it any wonder that many perceive the secret inquest as no less than a convenient tool to cover up the mistakes of government and its agents?

As Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors, put it: ‘The final duty of any democratic state is to investigate sudden death of any citizens. It should not be compromised.’

The Gazette agrees, but do you? Write to us and we promise to publish your letter either in the Gazette, or on our website.