This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/8482630.stm

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Supreme Court quashes terror rule Supreme Court quashes terror rule
(20 minutes later)
The UK Supreme Court has ruled that special Treasury orders that freeze the assets of terror suspects are unlawful.The UK Supreme Court has ruled that special Treasury orders that freeze the assets of terror suspects are unlawful.
The judges at the UK's highest court said the government had exceeded its powers by controlling the finances of five suspects.The judges at the UK's highest court said the government had exceeded its powers by controlling the finances of five suspects.
They also lifted a ban on identifying the men who brought the challenge.They also lifted a ban on identifying the men who brought the challenge.
The court said the government should have sought Parliament's approval for the asset freezing regime, rather than creating it automatically.The court said the government should have sought Parliament's approval for the asset freezing regime, rather than creating it automatically.
The case has already been heard by the Court of Appeal and the High Court. The five men at the centre of the case have only been allowed £10 a week in cash and need special permission for other expenses.
THE FIVE SUSPECTS Mohammed al-GhabraHani el Sayed Sabaei YoussefMichael Marteen, formerly Mohammed Tunveer Ahmed Mohammed Jabar Ahmed Mohammed Azmir Khan
But the ruling leaves the future of the regime in doubt. The Treasury has been given a month to deal with some of the issues and the lower courts are looking again at the others.
In the ruling, the Supreme Court justices said that if the government wanted to take "far-reaching measures" to combat terrorism then it needed the approval of Parliament.
Lord Hope said: "Even in the face of the threat of international terrorism, the safety of the people is not the supreme law.
"We must be just as careful to guard against unrestrained encroachments on personal liberty."
The two orders to freeze assets were brought in by Gordon Brown when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The original Terrorism (UN Measures) Order 2006 and the 2006 al-Qaeda and Taleban (UN Measures) Order were made under section 1 of the 1946 UN Act in order to implement resolutions of the UN Security Council.
Both orders became part of British law without a Parliamentary debate, which the men said was unfair because the government had created offences without putting it to a vote.
The men also argued that the British system went beyond what the UN had set out to do by targeting those accused of links to terrorism, rather than any link at trial.
Lord Hope said the Treasury had exceeded its powers in how it had devised and implemented the Terrorism Order.
"This is a clear example of an attempt to adversely affect the basic rights of the citizen without the clear authority of Parliament," he said.
Turning to the second type of restriction, the al-Qaeda Order, Lord Hope said that one of the five men, Mohammed al-Ghabra, had been denied a basic right to legally challenge the controls and argue that they were unfair.