LONDON, 8 October 2005 — British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s controversial new anti-terror legislation came under fire from two distinguished Law Lords. The draft legislation was published in September by Home Secretary Charles Clarke following Blair’s declaration on Aug. 5 that “let there be no doubt that the rules of the game are changing”.
The proposed anti-terror measures, which include a “list of unacceptable behaviors” published by Clarke is aimed at combating terrorism and curbing the activities of extremists, who have been accused of fanning radicalism especially among young British Muslims, in the wake of the July 7 suicide bomb attacks.
One of the draft bill’s more controversial provisions is the extension of the time police can detain suspects from the current two to six weeks to three months. The draft law also makes it a criminal offence to glorify, encourage and promote terrorism.
Lord Steyn, a former Law Lord, and Lord Lloyd of Berwick, who carried out the inquiry into terrorist legislation for the Conservative government in 1995-6, have warned that the proposed measures and legislation to combat terrorism and extremism were “intolerable” and probably unlawful. They stressed that there was a real possibility that people’s liberty was being endangered. The two Lords, speaking to the BBC’s Panorama program titled ‘Blair vs Blair’, which will be broadcast on Sunday, said that the new powers the government was seeking would be found to be unlawful and incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Lord Steyn warns that “experience shows that governments frequently ask for more powers than they need and when they get those powers they abuse them from time to time. We live in a country that Voltaire called ‘the country of liberty’: isn’t that being endangered?”
According to Lord Lloyd of Berwick, the new bill “begins to look... a little like internment. And it would certainly be seen that way by some of the ethnic minorities.”
The program also highlights differences of opinion between Blair and his wife, Cherie, who is a proponent of human rights. Cherie, speaking at a meeting in July, expressed concern over enacting legislation in response to terror attacks. “It is all too easy for us to respond to such terror in a way which undermines commitment to our most deeply held values and convictions and which cheapens our right to call ourselves a civilized nation,” she stressed.
