be advised...you are being watched, page-22

re: law council slams howard's scam. This seems quite straight forward.
As I recall, there was a case in the US rcently where the lawyer for a terrorist was passing information from the terrorist she/he represented who was in custody, and his terrorist cohorts outside.
I seem to recall the lawyer faced some legal conviction from that.

It seems fairly obvious that not all lawyers are squeaky clean and it seems completely obvious that lawyers involved in these cases should have a national security clearence and if they refuse to go through the necessary procedures, then they are not suitable to have a standing in this case.

A good point chuck, we must all be on the watch for lawyers who might not have the best interests of all Australians as heart, or have divided loyalties.

A requirement for a national security clearance, while not perfect, is a good start.