[rael-science] Amnesty International on terror laws: Dangerous. Ill-conceived. An assault on human rights

[selected by Rael]

Source: The Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article324062.ece


Amnesty International on terror laws: Dangerous. Ill-conceived. An
assault on human rights



Tony Blair's plans for tough new anti-terror legislation have been
subjected to a damning critique by Amnesty International, as MPs
prepare to debate the measures today.

In a submission to MPs, Amnesty International denounced the proposals
to increase police powers of detention and make a new offence of the
glorification of terrorism. It called them "ill-conceived and
dangerous" , amounting to an attack on "the independence of the
judiciary and the rule of law".

The organisation's onslaught - in the strongest language it has
deployed against the Blair Government - came as ministers braced
themselves for sustained opposition to the Terrorism Bill when it is
debated in the Commons from today. The Bill has already been
condemned by senior judges, lawyers and civil liberties groups.

A potentially powerful combination of opposition and rebel Labour MPs
are preparing to vote against plans to give police powers to hold
suspects for up to 90 days without trial - denounced as effective
internment. They also plan to oppose the creation of an offence of
"glorifying"' terrorism.

Amnesty's attack comes after a recent warning from Lord Carlile of
Berriew, the Government's terror watchdog, that 90-day detention
could breach human rights law.

The submission to MPs states: "Since the war on terror was declared
by the US government in 2001, the UK authorities have mounted a
sustained attack on human rights, the independence of the judiciary
and the rule of law."

It warned that the Bill contained "sweeping and vague provisions that
undermine the rights to freedom and expression and association, the
right to liberty, the prohibition of arbitrary detention, the rights
to the presumption of innocence and fair trial".

Amnesty International added: "One proposal is to introduce a crime
that involves the 'glorification of terrorism'. Such terms are broad,
vague and subjective. They have no legal clarity and can, therefore,
be used arbitrarily to restrict human rights, including freedom of
expression." It said the measures proposed after the bombings in
London on 7 July were " inconsistent with the UK's obligations under
domestic and international human rights law and that, if enacted,
they would lead to severe human rights violations".

The organisation made clear its alarm at the potential for new powers
to be abused. It said: "Once any government begins to 'sacrifice'
human rights in the name of security, it is not long before
individuals pay the price."

It said the anti-terror measures across the world had led to dissent
being stifled and allowed the state to commit human rights abuses.
Its report said evidence of that trend was already apparent in
Britain "with peaceful protesters who have been subjected to police
action under legislative provisions originally introduced to
purportedly counter terrorism".

Amnesty condemned Mr Blair's 12-point anti-terror plan, saying:
"Every element of which signalled further assaults on human rights,
particularly for those identified as Muslims, foreign nationals and
asylum-seekers." It said government statements linking the terrorist
threat with foreigners were "encouraging xenophobia, racism and
faith-hate crimes".

"There is a real danger that a range of the proposed additional
measures will further alienate the very communities the Government
needs on its side."

The Bill's critics will denounce the detention plans today as
draconian and protest that the proposed ban on the "glorification" of
terrorism is too widely drawn.

The Government's case for 90-day detention was supported yesterday by
Andy Hayman, Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police.

Mr Hayman, who is leading the hunt for al-Qa'ida sympathisers in
Britain, said: "We should not allow a premature guillotine to
frustrate or prevent the gathering of best evidence."

He urged the Home Office not to barter down the length of the
detention period "as you would buy a second-hand car" and there was
little sign ministers were preparing to offer a compromise on that at
this stage.

They are expected to delay any concessions until next week - and
before the Bill reaches the Lords - after the Government has assessed
the strength of opposition to the proposals.

Ministers have already conceded that judges more senior than
originally proposed would approve the renewal of detention orders
every seven days.

Left-wing Labour MPs, the Tories and Liberal Democrats have all
attacked the detention proposal, saying it breaches human rights.
They also argue that it risks radicalising Muslims who are arrested.

David Winnick, a Labour MP, has tabled a proposal suggesting the
period be set at 28 days. He said such a move would win support
across the Commons and the Lords would find it hard to overturn.

Opposition parties and civil liberties groups have also claimed that
the " glorification" proposal is so vaguely worded that it could, for
instance, make criminals of people who criticise brutal regimes in
Burma or Zimbabwe.

Mark Oaten, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: "As
this Bill stands, it will do more harm than good in the fight against
terrorism in this country.

"Detention without charge for three months goes against the
fundamental principles of justice and I hope Labour backbenchers will
recognise it as such."

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, said:
" Criminalising free speech and introducing internment are
dangerously counter-productive to fighting terrorism."

A Home Office spokeswoman said last night: "We believe this Bill is
compliant with human rights requirement under the European
Convention. All the proposals that have been made in the Bill allow
prosecutions through the normal court process."

'The rules of the game have changed'

TERRORISM ACT 2000

Introduced new powers for police to hold terror suspects for up to
seven days without charge - increased to 14 days in 2003 - and
widened powers to ban international terror organisations. It created
new offences of inciting terrorist acts, providing training for
terrorist purposes and providing instruction or training in the use
of firearms, explosives or chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

Government says: Replaced anti-terror legislation that dealt mainly
with Northern Ireland to reflect the new international nature of the
terrorist threat.

Amnesty argues: The Act introduced a "dangerously vague and broad
definition of terrorism" and made temporary anti-terrorism
legislation from the 1970s a permanent feature of British law.

ANTI-TERRORISM CRIME AND SECURITY ACT 2001

Gave the Home Secretary powers to hold foreign terrorist suspects
indefinitely without trial if they could not be deported for human
rights reasons. Suspects were not given full evidence against them.
Seventeen were eventually held at Belmarsh and other prisons.

Government says: Tough new measures required in the wake of the 11
September attacks; reflected concerns that Britain was a haven for terrorism.

Amnesty argues: The Act "violated a wide range of human rights" , and
introduced powers tantamount to a minister charging, trying and
sentencing people without fair trial. Detainees were thrown into a "
Kafkaesque world", and interned under "harsh conditions" using secret
evidence.

PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT 2005

Repealed powers to detain foreign terror suspects without charge,
after they were ruled illegal by the law lords. Introduced powers to
impose " control orders" limiting the movements and communications of
suspects. Powers were extended to all British and foreign nationals.

Government says: Fresh laws urgently needed to keep track of
potentially dangerous foreign terrorists.

Amnesty argues: The legislation was "hastily passed" to implement
control orders restricting the human rights of suspects and their
families. Most suspects were later imprisoned pending deportation on
national security grounds. Amnesty says the cumulative effect of the
detainees' treatment "amounts to persecution".

TERRORISM BILL 2005

Creates a new offence of glorifying or inciting terrorism, attending
a terrorist training camp and preparing terrorist acts. It also gives
police powers to hold suspects for up to 90 days.

Government says: The rules have changed after the July bombings in
London. Existing legislation contains a number of loopholes that need
to be closed.

Amnesty argues: The Bill "contains further sweeping and vague
provisions that undermine the rights to freedom of expression and
association, the right to liberty, the prohibition of arbitrary
detention, the rights to the presumption of innocence and fair trial."


----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]