Counter-terrorism policy and human Rights : Terrorism Bill and related matters, third report of session 2005-06, Vol. 2: Oral and written Evidence

The Joint Committee on Human Rights calls for a fundamental, independent review of the necessity for and proportionality of all counter-terrorism measures adopted since September 11 2001. It questions the way that the policy imperatives of national security and public safety have been used to justify squeezing out human rights considerations. Since September 11 2001, the Government has continuously claimed that there is a "public emergency threatening the life of the nation". The Committee questions whether the country has really been in this state for over eight years. A permanent state of emergency skews public debate about the justification for rights-limiting counter-terrorism measures. It is unacceptable that the Director General of the Security Service refuses to appear before it to give public evidence - despite giving public lectures and media interviews. The Committee finds the Government's narrow definition of complicity in torture significant and worrying and calls for an urgent independent inquiry into the allegations of complicity in torture. The Government should drop the draft bill still being held in reserve to allow pre-charge detention to be extended to 42 days. And more work should be done on measures - such as bail and the use of intercept evidence - that could reduce the use of pre-charge detention. The Intelligence and Security Committee should become a proper Parliamentary committee with an independent secretariat and legal advice and appointing an independent reviewer of counter-terror legislation who reports directly to Parliament not the Government.

Examines the Counter-Terrorism Bill before its second reading in the House of Commons. This title concentrates on five significant human rights issues needing thorough parliamentary scrutiny: pre-charge detention; post-charge questioning; control orders and special advocates; the threshold test for charging; and the admissibility of intercept.

Counter-terrorism policy and human rights (sixteenth Report) : Annual renewal of control orders legislation 2010, ninth report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal minutes and written Evidence

Presents a report on aspects of the Government's counter-terrorism strategy since the 2005 election. This book draws attention to criticisms of the UK's counter-terrorism law and policy in various reports by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the UN Human Rights Committee. HC 1077.

On 30th January 2008 the Home Secretary laid before both Houses of Parliament a draft Order to renew the control order legislation, the third annual extension of the control order regime. The Government takes the view that no amendments to the legal framework are necessary. The Committee disagrees and considers it imperative for the Government to amend counter-terrorism laws where experience has shown them to lead to breaches of human rights. Amongst their recommendations are: ensurance of timely availability of Lord Carlile's annual report on the control orders; the need to strengthen the intrusive powers contained in the control orders; modification of the Prevention of Terrorism Act to impose a maximum daily limit 12 hours on the curfew which can be imposed; review of the fairness of the special advocate procedure and a need to take into account the Committee's own earlier recommendations concerning this; maintaining the preferred policy of priority of prosecution; and greater transparency of decisions that prosecution is not possible.

This is a Government reply to the Joint HLP/HCP paper on counter-terrorism policy and human rights (HLP 157/HCP 394 06/07 ISBN 9780104011317). The Government accepts a number of the Committee's recommendations, including: that the issue of sufficient Parliamentary oversight of the 28 day pre-charge detention period, will now form part of the Government's consultation process on the Counter Terrorism Bill and there will be consideration of whether there is a need for an independent body to review the operation of pre-charge detention, as well as a review of the availability of statistics and information on this matter; the Government agrees that the upper limit to the period of pre-charge detention should be set by Parliament; the Government does not accept the Committee's argument that transferring suspects out of police custody to prison is undesirable, but that prison provides the detainee access to facilities beyond that available at a police station; the Government is reviewing with the police the issue of making video-recording interviews with terrorism suspects compulsory under the Terrorism Act 2000; the Government does not accept the Committee's recommendations on the level of medical record keeping, and believes the current system is sufficient. The reply covers other areas, including: intercept as evidence; pre-charge questioning and other alternatives to pre-charge detention and special advocates.

The main purpose of this Report is to comment on the adequacy of the additional safeguards which the Government has indicated it intends to bring forward to meet the human rights concerns about its proposal to extend the maximum period of pre-charge detention to 42 days. The report explains the Committee's conclusion that the additional safeguards are inadequate to protect individuals against the risk of arbitrary detention. The Committee recommends that the Government provide Parliament with the evidence on which it relies when it says that the threat from terrorism is growing. It also calls for information about the use made of the extended power to detain without charge for up to 28 days since it was last renewed in July 2007. No amount of additional parliamentary or judicial safeguards can render the proposal for a reserve power of 42 days' pre-charge detention compatible with the right of a terrorism suspect to be informed "promptly" of the charge against him under Article 5(2) ECHR. The Government has not included in the Counter-Terrorism Bill a provision to improve the existing arrangements for parliamentary review of the operation of extended pre-charge detention, and the report puts forward amendments to the Bill to improve such arrangements. In the Committee's view the recent examples of questionable information sharing by the intelligence services, which risk making the UK complicit in torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment, show that there is a need for substantive legal safeguards to guarantee against the arbitrary and disproportionate use of the power to disclose and use such information. The Committee proposes amendments to strengthen safeguards.

ŠA deep and thoughtful exploration of counter-terrorism written by leading commentators from around the globe. This book poses critical questions about the definition of terrorism, the role of human rights and the push by many governments for more secu

Terrorism law and legal practice has been politically and socially controversial to a degree beyond almost any other legal issue during the past few years, and this analytical text contains extensive analysis of these controversies. Terrorism and the Law offers a thoughtful and up-to-date discussion of all the key materials on terrorism law. It provides comprehensive coverage of all the major domestic, European, and international laws, and their impact on the UK. It also contains an extensive examination of the implementation of these terrorism laws, and of the practical issues they raise. The book contains three Parts. Part I focuses on meanings of 'terrorism' in law and political science. It provides the reader with an understanding of the phenomenon and the legal concept, including its statutory definitions, which is essential to the book's assessment of the strategies and tactics adopted in the codes of laws. It also covers normative constraints, such as human rights. Part II focuses on the United Kingdom law. It provides extensive coverage of the major UK terrorism legislation, such as: the Terrorism Act 2000; the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001; the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005; the Terrorism Act 2006; the Terrorism (Northern Ireland) Act 2006; the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007; and the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008. It also examines the key laws and rules relating to terrorism policing and legal processes. It discusses the meaning of these legislative materials, as well as their implementation, and includes reference to case law and practice statements from the police and courts. Part III reflects the impact of European, international and transnational laws and practices, covering international transnational cooperation and extradition, key European Union law measures against terrorism, other international law measures against terrorist activities, and international human rights and terrorism.