The Supreme Court of Canada said Thursday it will hear an appeal by several media organizations who are seeking to lift news reporting restrictions in a prominent terrorism case.

The appeal relates to the arrests in 2006 of the "Toronto 18," a group prosecutors accuse of planning to truck-bomb nuclear power plants and a building housing Canada's spy service.

One man has been convicted and another has pleaded guilty. Seven have had their charges either withdrawn or stayed, but the media has not been allowed to report why. The trials of the nine others, including the alleged ringleaders, have not started.

Reporters may attend the preliminary hearings but cannot report on them. Canada's criminal code allows judges broad discretion in limiting the publication of details of preliminary hearings, particularly if the accused has requested a ban.

Lawyers for the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., The Associated Press and the Toronto Star will take their appeal to the Supreme Court on Nov. 16.

Paul Schabas, one of the lawyers representing all four media outlets, said it was great that the court had agreed to hear the appeal.

"Bail hearings and decisions on releasing people are one of the most important decisions in the criminal justice system and because of these statutory bans people never know why people are released or not."

Possibility of tainting jurors a concern

Lawyers for the media lost an appeal before Ontario's Court of Appeal in a 3-2 majority decision announced in January.

The media lawyers have argued reporters are surrogates for the public in the courtroom and have an obligation to report on the allegations facing the suspects. Schabas said the public should be allowed to hear why some of the suspects were released.

But in the 3-2 majority lower court decision, Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Kathryn Feldman wrote that an accused person can be granted a publication ban in a preliminary hearing if there is any possibility the case will go to a jury.

Feldman, writing for the majority, ruled that the limit on freedom of expression is justified to prevent the potential breach of fair trial rights. The two dissenting judges agreed with the media's position.

Schabas has said the division in the court demonstrates that these types of cases must be more open.

Most of the lawyers for the suspects want the ban to remain.

They say news coverage could bias potential jurors.

There is also a case in Alberta that challenges the same section of Canada's law on bail hearings. In that case the public was shocked when an Edmonton man accused of killing his pregnant wife was released on bail. A publication ban prevented the public from knowing why he was released. The man was later convicted of second-degree murder. He has since appealed the verdict.