Opposition to terror laws hardens
Opposition to the Government’s controversial anti-terrorism plans has begun to harden.
The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have taken the unusual move of tabling a joint motion against the bill and civil liberties groups have reacted with outrage describing the measures as draconian.
On Tuesday, Home Secretary Charles Clarke told the Commons that the Government was proposing a series of control orders ranging from restricting terrorist suspects’ access to technology to home detention.
Though judges will be able to review the orders, Mr Clarke was adamant that the decision to impose an order should remain the Home Secretary’s, not a judge’s.
He said though that they would not be seeking to impose any house arrest orders at the present time.
But the judicial involvement does not go far enough to satisfy the opposition.
The joint Lib Dem and Conservative amendment reads: “This House declines to give a Second Reading to the Prevention of Terrorism Bill, because it contains excessive power in relation to requirements on a person to remain at a particular place when such powers are not presently necessary, gives to the executive powers that should be exercised by the judiciary, allows decisions to be made on an insufficient standard of proof, fails to address the need to bring terrorists to trial on the basis of all evidence available and thus wrongly infringes the right to liberty of the individual.”
Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti said that the new measures only contained a “fig leaf” of judicial involvement and did not constitute a fair trial.
Ms Chakrabarti said: “Belmarsh has taught us that it takes more than the fig leaf of judicial oversight to provide a fair trial. The Government may be surprised that apparent concessions have not found more friends. However the British public understand justice as involving the right to know and answer the charges and evidence against you.”
And Amnesty International said that the control orders would violate human rights.
Its spokesperson, said: “The United Kingdom (UK) Government’s proposal to issue, debate and pass a piece of legislation — introducing draconian measures and further derogating from obligations under international treaties — within the next few weeks, is a repeat of the way in which they railroaded the enactment of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (ATCSA) in 2001. As such it shows contempt for parliamentary and public scrutiny and debate.”
The chairman of the Bar Council, Guy Mansfield, said he believed that the legislation could be ripe for a legal challenge.
Mr Mansfield said: “It can be argued that the absence of a hearing on the merits in respect of restrictions on liberty when no trial is pending may not satisfy the courts. As such the proposals are ripe for challenge.”
Because of Labour’s large parliamentary majority the bill is likely to clear the Commons despite the opposition. But the House of Lords is expected to prove far less amenable.
The Government hopes to get the legislation through before March 14 when the current anti-terror legislation permitting suspects to be indefinitely detained without trial expires.
