LibCon terror review - The End of Big Brother?

[Mark Gobell]

Terror suspect 28-day detention limit to be reviewed

BBC

Page last updated at 13:36 GMT, Thursday, 24 June 2010 14:36 UK

Theresa May said anti-terror laws will be reviewed in the autumn

The detention of terror suspects for up to 28 days before charge will be reviewed, Home Secretary Theresa May has said.

She told MPs both parties in the coalition believed the 28-day period was a "temporary measure" and "will be looking to reduce it over time".

But the home secretary also announced that the limit would remain in place for at least another six months.

Civil rights group Liberty called for a reduction in the limit.

The 28-day limit, introduced under Labour's 2006 Terrorism Act, had prompted criticism from some civil rights groups.

'Serious threat'

The home secretary said the counter-terrorism legislation review will report in the autumn.

However, announcing her intention to renew the measure for another six months, Ms May said: "We face a serious threat and the nature of modern international terrorism means that police investigations can be longer and more complex than they have been in the past.

"At the same time, as a government, we are also committed to safeguarding the rights and liberties of the public.

"To ensure this balance is appropriately set, the government has made clear its commitment to review counter-terrorism legislation and pre-charge detention will form part of that review."

'Wholly unnecessary'

Liberty's director, Shami Chakrabarti, said the coalition government had "bound itself together with the language of civil liberties" and now must "reduce the longest pre-charge detention period of any western democracy".

She added: "A wide review of counterproductive counter-terror laws is welcome. At its conclusion, we also expect an end to the scandal of punishment without trial under control orders."

Meanwhile, former shadow home secretary David Davis said it was "wholly unnecessary" to extend the measure for another six months.

He said the legislation was unnecessary and one of a series of "authoritarian" measures introduced under the last government.

[Mark Gobell]

Which begs the question:

Where have all the "terrorists" gone ?

[Disco_Destroyer]

G20 Toronto :0

[Mark Gobell]

[Disco_Destroyer]

OK they run fascist dictatorships everywhere, most notably the West against a background of lies and disinformation!

ps though I meant of us the poor activists being rounded up in Canada or even prevented getting in!

[Mark Gobell]

It just seems to have gone awfully quiet on the 200 terrorist plots and 1000's of extremists front of late.

Worldwide too.

Have Al Q and it's affiliates given up the ghost ?

[Disco_Destroyer]

as if they existed right

I think the Economic Collapse is enough to keep most in line now. Who needs terrorists?

[Mark Gobell]

Even in the minds of the multitude believers, this question must, eventually arise.

So, historically it will be viewed how ?

An MI5 success ?

[Mark Gobell]

Section 44 Suspended
8 July 2010

The following statement was made by the Home Secretary Theresa May on the 8th July 2010 to the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a statement on stop and search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

On Wednesday of last week, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that its judgement in the case of Gillan and Quinton is final. This judgement found that the stop and search powers granted under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 amount to the violation of the right to a private life.

The Court found that the powers are drawn too broadly – at the time of their initial authorisation and when they are used. It also found that the powers contain insufficient safeguards to protect civil liberties.

The Government cannot appeal this judgement – although we would not have done so had we been able. We have always been clear in our concerns about these powers, and they will be included as part of our review of counter-terrorism legislation.

I can therefore tell the House that I will not allow the continued use of section 44 in contravention of the European Court’s ruling and, more importantly, in contravention of the civil liberties of every one of us. But neither will I leave the police without the powers they need to protect us.

Since last Wednesday, I have sought urgent legal advice and consulted police forces. In order to comply with the judgement – but avoid pre-empting the review of counter-terrorism legislation – I have decided to introduce interim guidelines for the police.

I am therefore changing the test for authorisation for the use of section 44 powers from requiring a search to be ‘expedient’ for the prevention of terrorism, to the stricter test of it being ‘necessary’ for that purpose. And, most importantly, I am introducing a new suspicion threshold.

Officers will no longer be able to search individuals using section 44 powers. Instead, they will have to rely on section 43 powers – which require officers to reasonably suspect the person to be a terrorist.

And officers will only be able to use section 44 in relation to the searches of vehicles. I will only confirm these authorisations where they are considered to be necessary, and officers will only be able to use them when they have ‘reasonable suspicion’.

These interim measures will bring section 44 stop and search powers fully into line with the European Court’s judgement. They will provide operational clarity for the police. And they will last until we have completed our review of counter-terrorism laws.

Mr Speaker, the first duty of government is to protect the public. But that duty must never be used as a reason to ride roughshod over our civil liberties. I believe that the interim proposals I have set out today give the police the support they need and protect those ancient rights.

I commend this statement to the House.

In other news, the former galley boy, thug and adulterer, John Prescott is now affectionately known as, Baron Prescott of Kingston-upon-Hull.

[TonyGosling]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1294415/Bonfire-Big-Brother-st ate-Coalition-unveils-drastic-review-New-Labours-attack-civil-libertie s.html

[Disco_Destroyer]

If it is they really do fear the awake citizens!!!

[Mark Gobell]

Home Secretary, Theresa May, Hansard 13 July 2010

Counter-terrorism and Security Powers

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mrs Theresa May): With permission, Mr Speaker, I shall make a statement on the review of counter-terrorism and security powers.

As I have said to the House before, the first duty of Government is to protect the public, but that duty must never be used as a reason to ride roughshod over our civil liberties-and that is what the previous Government did on far too many occasions. This Government are different. We have already introduced legislation to get rid of identity cards once and for all; we have already declared our intention to bring forward a freedom Bill later this year; and just last week I announced interim restrictions on the use of stop-and-search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Today, as promised in the coalition agreement, I am announcing an urgent review of counter-terrorism and security powers. The review will consider six key powers: control orders; section 44 stop-and-search powers and the use of terrorism legislation in relation to photography; the use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 by local authorities and access to communications data more generally; extending the use of deportations with assurances in a manner that is consistent with our legal and human rights obligations; measures to deal with organisations that promote hatred or violence; and the detention of terrorist suspects before charge.

Those are the most controversial and sensitive powers. In particular, the issue of pre-charge detention has been the subject of considerable debate in the House, and tomorrow we will consider whether to renew the current detention limit for a further six months. That will provide us with sufficient time to look carefully at pre-charge detention in the review and to explore how we can reduce the period of detention below 28 days. The review will also help to inform us on what additional safeguards are needed in the proposed asset freezing Bill, which the Treasury will introduce shortly.

The Government's work on the use of intercept as evidence in court and the modernisation of our interception capabilities will be done separately and will not form part of the review. The review will be conducted by the Home Office with the full involvement of the police, security and intelligence agencies and other Government Departments, including those in Scotland and Northern Ireland. I want the review to be conducted as openly and transparently as possible. I have asked Liberty to contribute to the review, and it has said that it would be delighted to do so. I am keen to involve other civil liberty and community organisations and, as with other reviews, I would urge anyone with an interest to submit their views to the Home Office.

To ensure independent oversight of the review, I have asked the noble and learned Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, the former Director of Public Prosecutions, to make sure that the work is conducted properly, that all the relevant options have been considered and that the recommendations of the review are not only fair but seen to be fair. That role is distinct from the excellent work that is already being undertaken by the noble and learned Lord Carlile of Berriew in his statutory role as independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. The proposals made by Lord Carlile will be fully considered as part of the review and I know that he welcomes the additional independent perspective that Lord Macdonald will provide on these issues. Any legislative amendments that result from the review will of course be subject to review by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. I have ordered that the review should be completed as quickly as possible, because it is important that the police and the security and intelligence agencies are able to do their vital work with certainty and confidence. I will report back to Parliament on the outcome of the review after the summer recess.

Before I finish, I want to make one thing absolutely clear. In correcting the mistakes of the previous Government, we are doing just that. We are not criticising or castigating members of the police or of the security and intelligence services. They do their work with bravery, patriotism and a strong sense of duty, and I know the whole House will want to join me in paying tribute to them. The review will enable this Government to put right the failures of the last Government and, in so doing, restore the ancient civil liberties that should be synonymous with the name of our country. I commend this statement to the House.