Anti-terrorist asset-freezing laws are “intrusive and humiliating” but an improvement on their predecessors, an independent review has found.
The Terrorist Asset-Freezing Act 2010 gives the Treasury power to freeze the assets of individuals and groups thought to be involved in terrorism, whether in the UK or abroad, and to deprive them of access to financial resources.
In his first annual report into the operation of the Act, David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, finds that the Act gives “remarkable” powers to the Treasury and makes nine recommendations for reform.
Some 34 individuals and eight groups are currently designated by the Treasury under the Act, and the Act applies to a further 22 individual and 25 groups listed by the EU. The majority of these people are in prison or based overseas. Many of those designated had few if any assets in the UK, and the total quantity of assets frozen in the UK and EU is about £100,000.
Five designated persons are at liberty in the UK, three having been released from prison and two having never been convicted. For these people, the need to seek approval and to account for every item of expenditure is “humiliating” and may feel like punishment, according to Anderson, who took up his post in February.
His recommendations include: dialogue between financial institutions and the Treasury to simplify their financial responsibilities so they can be discharged “without causing needless frustration and humiliation”; that the Treasury publish practical advice for designated persons; that the Treasury inform Parliament of legal challenges to the Act; that the Treasury publish a statement of policy on its approach to designation to promote consistency; and that a list of designated persons and groups be available on the treasury’s website.
However, his report concludes that the Act is an improvement on previous laws because it requires that there be a ‘reasonable belief’ rather than a suspicion of involvement in terrorism, and that designation must be necessary for purposes connected with protecting the public from terrorism. It also allows the family of the designated person to receive social security benefits.
Anderson said: “It reduces the chances that the wrong people will be caught. But it also enables the government, without putting them on trial, to keep a few British citizens and their families in what amounts to financial house arrest – an intrusive and humiliating experience.
“I have suggested some additional safeguards to ensure that this power is used only when absolutely necessary. I also express the hope, though this is a matter for the courts and for Parliament, that the law will soon be clarified so as to allow asset freezes to be contested on the basis of the fullest possible information about the reasons for them.”
