text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Civil Procedure Rules - Closed Material Proceedings
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  @ MP voted aye in favour of rules implementing the introduction of "closed material proceedings" to courts; the procedure involves making material deemed national security-sensitive available to the court and a special advocate but not parties to the case.
  @ MP voted no against rules implementing the introduction of "closed material proceedings" to courts; the procedure involves making material deemed national security-sensitive available to the court and a special advocate but not parties to the case.
  
  The majority of MPs voted in favour of rules implementing the introduction of "closed material proceedings" to courts; the procedure involves making material deemed national security-sensitive available to the court and a special advocate but not parties to the case.
  
  The motion approved by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
  
  :That the [http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1571/contents/made Civil Procedure (Amendment No.5) Rules 2013 (S.I., 2013, No. 1571)], dated 26 June 2013, a copy of which was laid before this House on 27 June, be approved.
  
  The rules approved relate to the use of "closed material proceedings" which allow relevant national security-sensitive material held by a party to court proceedings to be taken into account through its disclosure to both the court and a special advocate representing the other party or parties' interests as they are not themselves permitted to see the material. 
  
  During proceedings of the committee which considered the proposed rules Minister James Brokenshire stated:
  
  :It is worth reiterating at the outset that CMPs [closed material proceedings] will be available only in civil proceedingsâin cases when someone is suing or challenging the actions or decisions of the Government. They will not be available for inquests or criminal trials, and they will not allow a person to be found guilty of a crime without knowing the evidence against them.
  
  ==
  
  * [1] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmgeneral/deleg1/130715/130715s01.htm First Delegated Legislation Committee 15 July 2013]
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  