Attorney General defends terror detention laws
The Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, has defended the UK’s decision to opt out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in order to detain individuals without charge.
The provision to detain foreign nationals indefinitely without trial was included in the 2001 Anti Terrorism Act. The legislation required the UK to opt out of Section Five of the ECHR, which covers liberty of the individual. Countries are allowed to derogate from the section under Article 15, in “time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation”.
Eight men are currently held under the laws, and in some cases have been held for more than two and a half years. A ninth man was released last week. The men are free to return to their home countries, but the Government can not forcibly deport them if they face death or torture on their return.
Lawyers for the detainees have been asking the Law Lords to declare the legislation is incompatible with the ECHR, under the grounds that Section 15 did not apply to the UK post 9/11.
Representing the Government, the Attorney General Lord Goldsmith told the Law Lords that the legislation was necessary in the post- 9/11 world and he warned the threat to the UK from terrorists had not diminished.
He added it “must be accepted that Al-Qaeda plans further attacks”.
Lord Goldsmith said the Home Office introduced the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act due to the threat from select foreign nationals who had no legal right of residence in the UK.
Lord Goldsmith told peers: “To protect the human rights of the millions of British residents and those whose human rights the Government has a duty to protect, we took the view that, if these people cannot be deported, they should not be allowed to roam free on the streets and so they had to be detained.
“This was not a step taken lightly. The Government believes it was a legitimate and appropriate response to protect the human rights of the suspected international terrorists by not exporting them to death and torture and to protect the human rights of citizens here.”
Civil liberties groups, among them Amnesty International and Liberty, have constantly campaigned against the laws. They argue that the individuals must have access to some form of legal process, and should either be charged or released. The Government, however, argues that prosecutions could not take place in open court, either because the evidence would be inadmissible (for example gained from phone taps), or it would compromise security and intelligence personnel.
The hearing is expected to conclude today, but the Law Lords are unlikely to deliver their verdict for a number of months.
