Mounir Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, pictured, is facing trial along with Erol Incidal after being arrested by police in October

Two terror suspects can now be named for the first time after the Court of Appeal rejected chilling plans to hold Britain’s first secret trial.

Top judges said they were ‘gravely concerned’ that prosecutors wanted to try the men anonymously and behind closed doors.

They went on to say that it was ‘difficult to conceive of a situation’ where the departures from the principle of open justice could ever be justified, although the ‘core’ of the Old Bailey trial will still be held temporarily in secret to protect national security.

The decision represents a victory for open justice and comes after the Daily Mail and other media groups fought to have the draconian restrictions lifted.

The two defendants can now be named as Erol Incedal, a British national of Turkish origin, and Mounir Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, a British national of Algerian origin.

The pair, both 26, were arrested by Metropolitan Police firearms officers in October. They are due to go on trial as soon as next week accused of serious terrorist offences.

Incedal, who has links to London and was born overseas, is accused of ‘engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts’, which carries a potential life sentence.

He and Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, of London, are accused of possessing terrorist documents, including a file named ‘bomb making’ hidden on their mobile phones.

Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, who has described himself as a ‘fun-loving’ person online, faces a fourth charge under immigration laws of improperly obtaining a British passport.

The former ‘team leader’ for a charity housing association worked with vulnerable adults after graduating with a second-class degree in economics, and is listed as a joint director of a firm which appears to sell mobile phone software.

Scroll down for videos



Judges at the Court of Appeal ruled today that the 'core' of a terror trial could be held behind closed doors

Last week the Daily Mail and other media groups argued that to hold a trial in secret would be a ‘totally unprecedented departure from the principles of open justice’.

The Mail has long campaigned to expose the risk to democracy and openness from secret courts and there has been controversy around closed family courts, super-injunctions and civil cases involving national security.

After a week of deliberation, Lord Justice Gross rowed back on the original decision of the trial judge and underlined the importance of open courts. Giving his ruling at the Court of Appeal, he said open justice is a ‘hallmark and a safeguard’ of the rule of law.

He added that only the ‘minimum departure’ from the principle should be considered, even in the most serious cases.

A spokesman for the Attorney General Dominic Grieve said holding the trial behind closed doors was necessary to protect national security

But he said holding the ‘core’ of the terror trial temporarily in secret is justified in the ‘exceptional’ case for unknown national security reasons because the desire for all hearings to be open must give way to the ‘yet more fundamental principle’ that courts must ‘do justice’.

Sitting with two other judges, Lord Justice Gross went on to say: ‘We express grave concern as to the cumulative effects of holding a criminal trial in camera [behind closed doors]and anonymising the defendants.We find it difficult to conceive of a situation where both departures from open justice will be justified.’

Parts of the trial, including the swearing-in of the jury, charges, part of the prosecution opening, verdicts and – if appropriate – sentence will now be held in public.

In an unusual move, journalists will also be allowed to listen to most of the proceedings, but will not be allowed to report them until a later date. The reporters will sign confidentiality agreements and must leave their notes in the courtroom every day. They face ‘severe sanctions’ if information leaks out.

The judges made it clear that full details of the trial could possibly be published in the future, a decision that they will have to review at the end of proceedings.

Sadiq Khan, Labour’s justice spokesman, said the ruling has shown that a complete ‘cloak of secrecy’ is not acceptable.

But last night Tory MP Dominic Raab said MPs should still debate the bid to hold the majority of the terror trial in secret. He said the State could ‘hand-pick’ who covers the trial and make sure that existing powers were used to protect sensitive information.

Liberty spokesman Isabella Sankey said: ‘The judges are clear that open justice is a priceless foundation of our system and faced with a blacked-out trial we now have a few vital chinks of light.