Under current anti-terror laws you can be locked up and repeatedly questioned by police for up to 28 days without being charged. You might not even be told why you are there.

Pre-charge detention refers to the period of time that an individual can be held and questioned by police before being charged with an offence.

For individuals suspected of terrorism, the maximum period is currently 28 days – seven times the limit for someone suspected of murder. 


There are alternatives to extended pre-charge detention

- Remove the bar on the use of intercept (phone tap) evidence because its inadmissibility is a major factor in being unable to bring charges in terror cases. Liberty welcomes the Government’s proposed Privy Council review into the use of this evidence in terror trials.

- Allow post-charge questioning in terror cases, provided that the initial charge is legitimate and there is judicial oversight. This will allow for a charge to be replaced with a more appropriate offence at a later stage.

- Hire more interpreters: Prioritise the hiring of more foreign language interpreters to expedite pre-charge questioning and other procedures.

- Add resources: More resources for police and intelligence services.

- Liberty has pointed out that emergency measures which exist under the Civil Contingencies Act (2004) would allow the government to temporarily extend pre-charge detention in a genuine emergency where the police are overwhelmed by multiple terror plots. These powers would be subject to parliamentary and judicial oversight. Liberty believes that even such an extreme measure would be preferable to creating a permanent state of emergency.

The first Charge or Release campaign: NO to 42 Days

On 6 December 2007 the Home Secretary announced new anti-terror proposals, which include extending this maximum limit to 42 days.

After an overwhelming defeat in the House of Lords on 12 October 2008, the Government dropped this dangerous and unnecessary proposal.
The UK already has the longest period of pre-charge detention in the western world, and there is no evidence that a further extension will make us any safer. There were serious flaws in the extension the Government proposed, including:

● Powers for the Home Secretary to extend pre-charge detention in individual cases beyond 28 days without any evidence of a genuine emergency situation.

● Weak Parliamentary oversight as MPs are not allowed to vote when powers are activated.

● Inadequate judicial oversight, as the courts will not be able to review the decision to extend pre-charge detention.

Liberty believes that a further extension beyond 28 days is unjust, unnecessary and will not - as the Government has argued - make us any safer.

Narrowly passed in the House of Commons on 11 June (by 315 to 306 votes) the controversial proposals generated widespread concern about the negative impact on civil liberties and community relations. 

The battle against the Government proposals was taken up in the House of Lords, and several eminent peers spoke out against the proposal before the Upper House rejected the proposal by a devastating 191 votes. The Home Secretary announced that the Government was dropping the proposal shortly afterwards.

Some media reports claimed that the Government's proposals had overwhelming public support. In fact, a YouGov poll commissioned by Liberty in April 2008 found that 54 percent of the public believed the Government’s motivation for extending pre-charge detention periods is to look “tough on terror”.