Detainees and control orders
News about detainees and control orders
Talha has already been detained for over 6 years without trial or charge in the UK on the notorious 2003 US-UK extradition treaty. He has now been extradited to the US. If convicted he faces life without parole in solitary confinement at ADX Florence, Colorado. Support the campaign here: http://freetalha.org
Sponsored by CASE and the Cordoba Foundation and held on 19 December 2011 at the London Muslim Centre, Whitechapel, London with panelist Bruce Kent (Pax Christi), Asim Qureshi (Cageprisoners), Gareth Peirce (solicitor) and Jean Lambert (Green MEP for London). During the meeting a statement was read by the wife of one of the SIAC prisoners. Panelist and other CASE members read statements on behalf of other detainees and their families all of whom remain ensnared by the proecess of detention and restrictions on their liberty as a result of secret evidence.
This week saw the government publish a highly controversial green paper proposing the use of secret evidence in compensation cases brought by alleged victims of torture.
Response from Scotland Against Criminalising Communities (SACC) to the Coalition Government's Review of Counter-Terrorism and Security Powers 2010
SACC urges the Government to end the control order regime, scrap the blanket stop and search powers given to police under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, end its reliance on meaningless "diplomatic assurances" to excuse deporting people to countries where they could face torture, and drastically reduce the 28 day period for which terrorism suspects can be held without charge.
From 'War' to Law, draws together all of Liberty’s concerns over excessive and unjustified counter-terror measures introduced since the advent of the “War on Terror”, with control orders at the top of the list of internationally embarrassing assaults on fundamental human rights. Read the report here.
Links and resources
Liberty's Charge or Release campaign
The Coalition against Secret Evidence (CASE) was set up in February 2009, CASE is made up of individuals and organisations working on the issue of the use of secret evidence in the UK courts.
Also see Resources: legislation
Control orders create a ‘domestic prison’ regime
"The real threat to the life of the nation… comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these... It calls into question the very existence of an ancient liberty of which this country has, until now, been very proud - freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention"
Lord Hoffman, December 2004
In March 2005, despite huge opposition from the public and the House of Lords, the Prevention of Terrorism Act became law. In the name of ‘anti-terror’ measures, the new ‘control orders’ treat people as guilty. They are branded forever as individuals ‘involved in terrorism-related activity’. These measures violate a fundamental principle: innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial. They punish individuals for what they might do, not what they have done. Already such orders have restricted association, telephones and internet use, while imposing electronic tagging. Later these powers may be extended to house arrest. Any breach of such conditions could lead to imprisonment. More people may have new orders imposed at any time.
CAMPACC's submission to the Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry into Control Orders, February 2006. (pdf file)
On Friday 3rd December 2005 Lord Carlile published his report supporting the government’s use of ‘control orders’(under the PTA 2005), as measures supposedly necessary to protect us all from suicide bombings. Thus he justified punishment without trial, even without public evidence against those punished. The same day was the deadline for submissions to the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) inquiry into control orders. CAMPACC’s submission attacked the ‘domestic prison’ regime which results from control orders and from bail conditions under the Immigration Act 1971. All these restrictions create a domestic prison for anyone who acts as a host, e.g. the person’s family, friend or volunteer. These measures violate basic human rights, yet the government acts as if no derogation from the ECHR is necessary.
Read the Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry into Control Orders Report, February 2006 (pdf files)
On 14th February 2006, the JCHR published its report, appending submissions from several opponents of control orders (CAMPACC, SACC, Liberty, Justice, etc.). The solicitors Tyndallwoods quote their client Mr X as follows: ‘I was in prison before on my own, but now my whole family is in prison.’ (p.92). In its main report, Counter-Terrorism Policy and Human Rights: Draft Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (Continuance in force of sections 1 to 9) Order 2006, the JCHR regards control orders as so restrictive of liberty as to require a derogation from the ECHR. Moreover, argues the JCHR, control order proceedings amount to determination of a criminal charge and so warrant the full protections of a criminal trial. The Committee opposes the government’s plan to renew the control order powers without any derogation and without Parliamentary debate (before the powers lapsed on 11th March 2006). Read Scotland Against Criminalising Communities press release drawing out the main points of the report, 14 February 2006
No punishment without trial: repeal the political 'control orders'
CAMPACC's response to the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and the control orders, March 2005
The end of Internment?
CAMPACC statement in reponse to the Law Lords’ ruling on indefinite detention, 23 December 2004.
Other articles and reports
On 13 July 2010, the Home Secretary announced a “rapid review” by the Home Office of key counter-terrorism powers. The purpose of this submission is to outline Amnesty International’s primary concerns in relation to four of the six powers under consideration; the control orders regime; the use of diplomatic assurances in the context of national security deportations; the 28 day limit for pre-charge detention of people suspected of terrorism-related activity; and the use of stop and search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Read the report here.
Anmesty International Report: UK violates rights of terror suspects with ‘unfair’ control orders
Amnesty International has accused the UK government of developing a "shadow justice system" that imposes severe restrictions on the rights of individuals suspected of terrorism-related activity.
In a new report, Five years on: time to end the control orders regime, the organization repeats its call on the UK government to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (PTA) and abandon the use of control orders that violate the individual’s rights to liberty, freedom of movement, expression, association and privacy. 12 August 2010
Britain's own Guantánamo
The injustices faced by those charged with control order breaches are indefensibly brutal.
Gareth Peirce, The Guardian, December 21, 2007
The reality of living under a control order
Statement made at the House of Lords meeting, 29 March 2006
Families speak out on control orders
A report of the meeting held in the House of Lords, 29 March 2006
The Forgotten Detainees under Control Orders
by Ann Alexamder, Scotland Against Criminalising Communities, April 2005
A stampede against justice
In a plea to parliamentarians, Gareth Peirce spells out the dangers of control orders
The Guardian, 8 March 2005