[ssf] UK: Home Secretary's proposal fails to provide justice

[zerosevenfour two]

Today’s proposals from UK Home Secretary Charles Clarke fall short of the 
government's obligations under human rights law, Amnesty International said 
today (26 January 2005).

Charles Clarke announced that detaining foreign "terror" suspects without 
trial will be replaced by restrictions on movement and communication, in 
some cases amounting to house arrest. The proposed new measures will also 
apply to UK citizens.

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:

"However he puts it, the Home Secretary is giving himself the power to place 
anyone in the UK under house arrest, without charge or trial, based on 
secret evidence – UK citizens included.

Clarke announces terror suspect controls

Simon Jeffery
Wednesday January 26, 2005

Guardian Unlimited
British terrorism suspects could be put under a series of controls 
stretching from limits on internet communication to de facto house arrest 
under plans announced today by Charles Clarke, the home secretary.

In response to a law lords ruling that the detention without trial of 12 
foreign nationals was disproportionate and discriminatory, Mr Clarke said 
the system of control orders intended to replace those powers could now 
apply to both British citizens and foreign nationals.

The control orders will include curfews, electronic tagging and even a 
requirement for suspects "to remain at their premises". Mr Clarke told the 
Commons their scope took account of the "more significant role" British 
nationals were playing in the terror threat.

Foreign nationals held in Belmarsh and Woodhill prisons will not be released 
until the legislation is in place.

The law lords ruling, which came just before Christmas, struck at the heart 
of the emergency anti-terror legislation passed by the former home secretary 
David Blunkett in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on New York and 
Washington.

Mr Clarke said the law lords had ruled that section four of the act - which 
gave the home secretary power to detain without trial foreign nationals who 
could not be deported - breached sections of the European convention on 
human rights.

But he insisted Britain was still facing a public emergency. "We still need 
to decide how to deal with the threat posed by terrorists without the part 
four powers," he told the Commons.

"The existence and use of these powers has helped to make the UK a far more 
hostile environment for international terrorists to operate in, with the 
result that some have been deterred from coming here and others have left to 
avoid being certified and detained."

Mr Clarke said a twin approach was now needed - deportation with assurances 
for foreign nationals, and control orders to contain and disrupt people who 
could not be prosecuted or deported.

He said the the government was in talks with some of the detainees' home 
countries to guarantee they would not face torture or the death penalty if 
they were deported. The foreign nationals are believed to come from Algeria, 
Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan.

David Davis, Mr Clarke's Tory shadow, said he was concerned that the home 
secretary's proposals could also be applied to British nationals.

"Throughout our history, millions of British subjects have sacrificed their 
lives in defence of the nation's liberties, and it would be a sad paradox if 
we were to sacrifice the nation's liberty in defence of our own lives 
today," he said.

Mr Davis warned that house arrest was effectively internment, a tactic which 
had generally backfired throughout history.

The Muslim Council of Britain said it broadly welcomed the announcement.

"The MCB has long argued that the indefinite detention of these foreign 
terror suspects was discriminatory and that their continued incarceration 
without charge represented our very own mini-Guantanamo Bay," said 
secretary-general Iqbal Sacranie.

"It is encouraging that the government is now looking at more humane 
alternatives to indefinite detention."

The Law Society said placing terror suspects under house arrest with no 
plans to try them in court would be an "abuse of power".

Controversially, the new control orders will be imposed by the home 
secretary and not the courts.

"The secretary of state would consider whether, on the basis of an 
intelligence assessment provided by the security service, there are 
reasonable grounds for suspecting that an individual is or has been 
concerned with terrorism," Mr Clarke said.

"If the answer to this is yes, and he or she considers it necessary for the 
purposes of protecting the public from terrorist activities, he or she would 
impose controls on that individual."

Key features of the orders will include:

· Restricting movement
· Restricting association and communication with "named individuals"
· Limiting access to telephones, the internet or other technology.

Breaching an order would be a criminal offence - similar to the way in which 
anti-social behaviour orders operate - leading to possible imprisonment.

Judges will provide independent scrutiny of the orders, involving open and 
secret hearing.

The human rights lawyer Clive Stafford-Smith described the proposals as a 
"further abuse of human rights in Britain" as he visited Paddington Green 
police station, in London, where former detainees at Guantánamo Bay are 
being held.

Referring to the announcement, he told the Press Association: "I hope we, as 
British people, say no - we have had enough."

0742

_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch with absent friends - get MSN Messenger 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger