Baby P case review due tommorrow.

On August 3rd 2007 a child known only as Baby P was murdered in Haringey, London. Over the 17 months of his short life he was tortured and beaten by his mother mother and stepfather. At the time of his death Baby P had over 50 separate injuries including 8 broken ribs, severe bruising to his body and head. He had cuts to his eyes, lips and scalp. His ears had nearly been torn from his head. His fingernails had been torn from the nail beds, his spine had been broken, paralysing him from the waist down and he had been punched so hard in the face that it caused bruising to his neck so severe that it eventually choked him to death.

When the trial of the parents was completed and reporting restrictions on the case were finally lifted it emerged that Baby P had been on Haringey's child services "At risk register" since September 2006. This meant that for the 11 months in which the worst of the abuse had taken place Baby P's family were being visited on a weekly basis by social workers who noted that the child showed signs of multiple beatings and had been trained to lie, like a dog, on the floor of his filthy home whenever his stepfather clicked his fingers. Over this time social services twice tried to take Baby P in to protective care and the police twice tried to prosecute the mother for the abuse her son suffered. On both occasions these attempts were blocked by "Persons Unknown" within Haringey council. The last of these attempts was blocked just day's before Baby P's death. In response to this horrific failure of social services the children minister ordered an immediate review into the case.

This review is to be published tomorrow, December 1st but don't expect to be able to read it because it has been sealed, not just from members of the public but from the House of Commons itself. The only people who will be able to read it are members of the cabinet, select members of the opposition and civil servants in relevant government departments. Ostensibly this has been done to protect the identities of those involved in the case but this is of course nonsense because the names of many of those involved are already a matter of public record. We can name Baby P's social worker, Maria Ward. We can name the local head of child protection, Gillie Christou. We can name Sharon Shoesmith, the local head of child services and we can name Dr Sabah Al Zayyat, the doctor who failed to diagnose Baby P's broken ribs and back.

Hell if I wanted too I could even name Baby P's mother and step-father but I see no reason to keep them on a segregation wing. In fact the only person whose identify is left to be protected is that of the "Person Unknown" who ignored the advice of both the police and social services and ordered Baby P home to face his agonising death.

Normally this level of secrecy, where MP's are not even allowed to discuss the case using pseudonyms, is resevered for cases that involve members of the UK military on covert operations such as the SAS and the members of Military Intelligence that guide these operations. I can only assume that the Baby P case is being protected from even parliamentary oversight because the "Person Unknown" who overruled all those who were trying to protect Baby P did so while acting as an agent of the British Army. If this is the case then this person has forfeited all rights afforded to them by civilian law and must be punished under the military codes of practice. As no-one has reported seeing soliders marching through the corridors of Haringey town hall we can assume that this individual was not wearing appropriate military uniform at the time the offence was committed. This makes them a non-uniformed combatant and the UK has already made it clear what happens to non-uniformed combatants. They are shipped off to Guantanamo Bay where they are detained and tortured indefinitely.

With such a clear precedent of what is "appropriate punishment" I hope the minister understands that the individual involved cannot be considered as "held to account" until they have been stripped of their position, stripped of their pension and stripped of all assets the acquired with their salaries.