Counter terrorism laws, human rights and multi-culturalism
(to be updated Autumn 2007)
It is the first human rights duty of government to protect the lives and livelihoods of the people. But the government’s laws and policies to prevent terrorism must hold a balance between this prime right and other civil and political rights; they must be proportionate to the danger; and they must be effective. Our report, The Rules of the Game, finds that the government’s response is far from being either proportionate or effective. We describe the serious losses in human rights and criminal justice protections; the erosion of the fabric of justice and civil liberties in the UK; and the harm that is being done to minority communities and community relations. As we warn, the government has put at risk its own balanced counter terrorism strategy for short-term and sometimes electoral gains, thus prejudicing the ability of the security forces to gain the trust and cooperation from the Muslim communities that they require to combat terrorism effectively:
- Its boomerang effect was being made more damaging by government statements, in particular those of the Home Secretary, John Reid, which were liable to stoke the terrorist threat, not reduce it.
- A 'shadow', or parallel, criminal justice system of special courts and special advocates has been erected to detain suspects indefinitely without a full and open trial.
- A parliamentary committee has warned that the control orders regime may breach human rights law on four counts and also violates the human rights of the families of detainees.
- Suspects may now be held for up to 28 days without being charged for an offence, but the government and security forces still want to extend the period of detention for up to 90 days.
- The government is misusing immigration powers to hold foreign suspects indefinitely.
- There is a case for a limited 'trade off' between surveillance and other civil and political rights since, at least for the time being, surveillance is most likely to deliver the intelligence that is required to prevent terrorism. But this would require strong safeguards against abuse.
- The major 'trade off' that is occurring is not between this or that right, but between the rights of the majority population and those of minorities, especially the Muslim communities. Measures against the terrorist threat have been 'racialised'.
Democratic Audit has recommended a series of major changes in policy, including making intercept information admissible in courts to facilitate proper trials instead of secret justice.
|
|
|
|
