header-logo header-logo

Terror detention halved

02 February 2011
Issue: 7451 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Council snoops out in new “control orders-lite” plan

The maximum length of time terror suspects can be detained without being charged is to be reduced from 28 days to 14, the Home Office has announced.

Section 44 “stop and search” powers will be replaced by narrower powers allowing a senior police officer to authorise stop and search where they have reason to suspect a terrorist attack and searches are necessary to prevent it.
Control orders will be repealed, although the home secretary will continue to be able to impose restrictions on suspects’ movement, association and travel on the basis of “reasonable belief”.

The annual requirement to review counter-terrorism laws has been dropped.
Local authorities will see their surveillance powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act restricted to serious offences that carry a six-month jail sentence and where a magistrate has authorised their use, putting an end to council snooping. Last year, Poole Council was ruled to have unlawfully spied on a family to check they lived within the school catchment area.

The changes are part of a package of reforms announced by the Home Office last week following its review of counter-terrorism powers.
Civil liberties groups have welcomed the review, but questioned the need for continued restrictions on suspects who have not been charged with a criminal offence.

Liberty branded the control orders replacement “control order-lite”. Its director, Shami Chakrabarti says: “We welcome movement on stop and search, 28-day detention and council snooping, but when it comes to ending punishment without trial, the government appears to have bottled it.

“Spin and semantics aside, control orders are retained and rebranded, if in a slightly lower fat form. As before, the innocent may be punished without a fair hearing and the guilty will escape the full force of criminal law.”

Eric Metcalfe, Justice’s director of human rights policy, says: “Criminal prosecution remains the only just and effective way of dealing with suspected terrorists.

“Seven men absconded under the control order regime. It seems even less likely that any serious terrorist would be stopped by the watered-down version announced today.”

Issue: 7451 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

Constantine Law—Alex Finch & Rebecca Tester

Constantine Law—Alex Finch & Rebecca Tester

Firm launches business immigration practice with dual partner hire

Freeths—Jane Dickers

Freeths—Jane Dickers

Scottish offering strengthened with dispute resolution partner hire in Glasgow

NEWS
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Writing in NLJ this week, Thomas Rothwell and Kavish Shah of Falcon Chambers unpack the surprise inclusion of a ban on upwards-only rent reviews in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
back-to-top-scroll