Liberty calls the system ‘unsafe and unfair", failing both as a method of controlling genuinely dangerous people and protecting innocent suspects – seven suspects on control orders have absconded and the High Court has impugned the legality of control orders on a number of occasions. The Government’s own reviewer of terrorism, Lord Carlile, has stated in his most recent report that control orders beyond two years are ineffective and unjustified.
Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty, said:
“Control orders constitute permanent punishment without trial and one of the worst legacies of the War on Terror. The innocent can be placed under permanent house arrest on the basis of secret intelligence, possibly flowing from torture – the guilty may easily remove their plastic tags, disappear and do their worst. ”
"Any MP who believes in fair trials and regaining Britain's moral authority must vote against renewing this cruel and self-defeating nonsense today."
As an alternative to control orders, Liberty suggests measures which will make it easier for police and prosecutors to bring criminal prosecutions against terror suspects. These include allowing the use of intercept evidence in the criminal courts and providing more resources for the intelligence and security community. In addition, since the Prevention of Terrorism Act was enacted, a range of new and broad terror-related offences have been added to the statute book making it easier for police to investigate and charge suspects.
Contact Mairi Clare Rodgers on 020 7378 3656 or 07973 831128 NOTES TO EDITORS
1. Control orders were brought in by the Government under the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act after the Law Lords ruled that indefinite detention without charge for foreign terror suspects in Belmarsh prison violated their human rights. Control orders (applicable to British and non-nationals alike) severely restrict who a person can meet, where they can go and all cases have involved electronic tagging. Restrictions have included lengthy curfews and bans on unauthorised visitors and internet access. Control orders can last indefinitely. The person does not have to be accused of any crime and does not have to be told why they are under suspicion.
2. Liberty’s briefing on control order renewal can be found
here.
3. The full report by the Government’s reviewer of terrorism on control orders can be found
here.
4. The Government’s argument that it is impossible to prosecute terror suspects is fast unraveling. Liberty has suggested that unnecessary hurdles to prosecuting terror suspects can be overcome in the following ways:
- Remove the bar on intercept (phone tap) evidence in criminal trials because its inadmissibility is a major factor in being unable to bring charges. The Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions and a former Head of MI5 have argued that it should be possible to use intercept evidence in court so that more terror suspects can be prosecuted.
- More resources for police and intelligence services.
