Report comment

Just going through the motions. Privately, I think that the SFO must have known in advance that a lot of the evidence would have ramifications on UK National Security and thus therefore cannot be presented in open court, and the court obviously wasn't going to agree to hear a fraud case in camera.

And the same reason no doubt also applies (but in a major larger scale) as to why a certain bank could not (and can never) be prosecuted either in the UK or in the U.S..