Two soldiers were today granted the right to be screened from public view when giving evidence to the Bloody Sunday inquiry.
Lord Saville, chairman of the hearing into the January 1972 atrocity when paratroopers shot dead 13 unarmed civilians in Derry, announced the "exceptional cases" of soldiers B and J meant under the European Convention of Human Rights there should be a blanket ban on their identity being disclosed.
He said: "There are the most compelling reasons for granting the application because in our view to order the evidence of these two soldiers to be given unscreened ... would undoubtedly breach Article 2 rights of these two individuals."
All soldiers due to give evidence to the inquiry when it moves to London in September have been given anonymity.
But today's decision means the two soldiers will not be seen by the public, media representatives or the families of the dead and wounded.
They will only be visible to members of the tribunal, lawyers and Ministry of Defence officials.
British Defence Secretary Mr Geoff Hoon had applied to the inquiry for a Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificate on behalf of soldier B, thought to be one of the first to open fire on Bloody Sunday.
Mr Hoon claimed national security would be put at risk if his face was seen. Terrorists could also target him for assassination as a result, he added.
According to Mr Hoon, soldier B gave controversial evidence to the original Widgery Tribunal in 1972 where he claimed to have come under attack from a nail bomber.
His account was that he fired three shots at the man because he feared for his own and his colleagues' safety. The man fell and was carried away.
Mr Hoon said: "I have unequivocally concluded that it would be damaging to the public interest for soldier B to give evidence unscreened because of the serious harm that it would do to national security."
But Lord Saville said this issue had not been considered because the other argument had been so strong.
Although reluctant to conduct any part of the inquiry behind closed doors, he said: "There is, to our minds at least, absolutely no doubt that the openness of this inquiry must give way to the extent necessary to protect the human rights of individuals."
PA