Government must keep us safe ‘safeguard human rights’
A Parliamentary committee has raised ‘serious concerns’ about proposed anti-terrorism legislation.
Reporting this week, the Joint Committee on Human Rights casts doubt on the lawfulness of powers in the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill currently going through Parliament.
The Bill, which had its Second Reading debate on 11 June, strengthens counter-terrorism powers and provides for the questioning of persons at ports and borders.
In their report, however, the MPs and Peers say the powers in the Bill are too vaguely defined and lack sufficient safeguards to protect human rights. In particular, they were concerned that Clause 1, which criminalises ‘expressions of support’ for proscribed organisations, could ‘have a chilling effect’ on debate about the government’s use of its proscription powers.
They said Clause 2, which would criminalise the publication of certain images online, for example, a photo of an ISIS flag hanging on someone’s wall, goes too far and risks stifling freedom of expression; and that Clause 3, which criminalises viewing terrorist material online more than three times, risks breaching the right to receive information and could jeopardise journalistic and academic research. The defence of ‘reasonable excuse’ required more clarity, they said.
They also supported greater safeguards over the retention of biometric data such as DNA or fingerprints for an extended period of time and expressed concern that stop and search powers at ports were defined too widely.
Harriet Harman MP, Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, said: ‘The government has got an important job to keep us safe from terrorism.
‘But it must also safeguard human rights. The Committee believes that this Bill goes too far and will be tabling amendments in both the Commons and the Lords.’
The committee drew on written submissions and oral evidence from Max Hill QC, independent reviewer of terrorism legislation and Corey Stoughton, advocacy director at Liberty.
