The legal arguments behind the naming of Marine A
Media organisations including Guardian argued that naming Alexander Blackman was in interests of open justice
It has taken more than a year for the courts to agree that the man previously known as Marine A should be named.
The Guardian first wrote to Jeff Blackett, the judge advocate general, in October 2012 questioning whether Alexander Blackman – and two other marines charged but cleared of murder – should be identified. During the trial at Bulford military courts centre in Wiltshire they were known only as Marines A, B and C and at all times were hidden behind a screen, the sort of protection usually afforded to members of the special forces.
At the end of the trial, however, following more representations from the Guardian and other media organisations, Blackett changed his position and said he was not convinced there was a real and immediate threat to the men. The prosecution supported the media’s position while the Ministry of Defence remained neutral. Blackett said he felt they should be named in the interests of open justice but gave them leave to argue at the court martial appeal court that they should retain their anonymity.
During the appeal hearing in London, Blackman’s barrister, Hugh Tomlinson QC, said the unique and historic nature of his client’s conviction meant his identity should be kept secret. He argued that he would be in danger even while in prison and said his family would also be targeted. The Guardian, Associated Newspapers, News Group, the Independent and BSkyB countered that because the case was of such “unusual interest and importance” Blackman ought to be identified. Finally three of the most senior judges in the country, including the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas, agreed he should be named.
