header-logo header-logo

05 June 2008 / Susan Nash
Issue: 7324 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Human rights law update

CONDITIONS IN DETENTION
EXTRADITION AND DEPORTATION
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

CONDITIONS IN DETENTION
The applicants in A and others v United Kingdom; (App no 3455/05) had been allegedly involved in terrorist groups with links to Al Qa’eda. They were detained under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (ACSA 2001) which provided that certified individuals could be detained pending deportation—despite the fact that their removal from the UK was unlikely because of a risk that they would face torture or ill treatment if returned to their country of origin. Each applicant had been certified as an international terrorist and initially detained at Belmarsh Prison.

While some applicants elected to leave the UK, three were transferred to Broadmoor secure mental hospital following deterioration in their mental health, and another was released on bail because of concern over his mental health.

Following a visit to the detainees in February 2002 and March 2004, the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) published a report which was critical of detention conditions in Belmarsh Prison

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll