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/7070396.stm
The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 4 | Version 5 |
|---|---|
| Lords want control order rethink | Lords want control order rethink |
| (31 minutes later) | |
| The Law Lords have ordered the government to reconsider control orders imposed on eight terrorism suspects. | The Law Lords have ordered the government to reconsider control orders imposed on eight terrorism suspects. |
| But they did not declare the controversial anti-terrorism measure to be completely unlawful. | But they did not declare the controversial anti-terrorism measure to be completely unlawful. |
| In rulings on nine individuals, the Lords said control orders which included 18-hour curfews, restricting someone to their homes, were too long. | In rulings on nine individuals, the Lords said control orders which included 18-hour curfews, restricting someone to their homes, were too long. |
| The Lords ordered the courts to rethink two cases because the proceedings had breached a right to a fair hearing. | The Lords ordered the courts to rethink two cases because the proceedings had breached a right to a fair hearing. |
| But in a complicated series of linked rulings, the country's most senior judges said they would not rule the controversial system illegal. | But in a complicated series of linked rulings, the country's most senior judges said they would not rule the controversial system illegal. |
| WHAT THE LAW LORDS SAID 18-hour curfews: Unfair Evidence procedures: Unfair Shorter curfews: legalWider regime: legal | |
| Instead, they criticised some specific issues, including attempts by the home secretary to place some terrorism suspects under highly restrictive house arrest-style conditions. | Instead, they criticised some specific issues, including attempts by the home secretary to place some terrorism suspects under highly restrictive house arrest-style conditions. |
| In two of the cases, the Lords said that the subjects had been denied a right to a fair trial because of what they were allowed to know about the case against them. | |
| The control order system was introduced in March 2005 after the Law Lords ruled indefinite detention without trial had breached the rights of some foreign national suspects. | The control order system was introduced in March 2005 after the Law Lords ruled indefinite detention without trial had breached the rights of some foreign national suspects. |
| Control orders aimed to get around that major ruling by severely restricting the freedoms of British and foreign suspects, without imprisoning them. | Control orders aimed to get around that major ruling by severely restricting the freedoms of British and foreign suspects, without imprisoning them. |
| Curfews and control | Curfews and control |
| Under the system, the Home Office can impose daily curfews, restrictions on whom a subject can meet and where they are allowed to go. | Under the system, the Home Office can impose daily curfews, restrictions on whom a subject can meet and where they are allowed to go. |
| THE KEY CASES MB: British man in South YorkshireJJ and others: IraqisAF: UK/LibyanE: Tunisian Key cases profiled | |
| Ministers say the system is necessary for people where there is intelligence they are involved in terrorism - but not enough evidence for a prosecution. | Ministers say the system is necessary for people where there is intelligence they are involved in terrorism - but not enough evidence for a prosecution. |
| The conditions can include being electronically tagged and bans on using telephones and the internet. Some controllees must call in to security officials at irregular hours to prove they are at home. | The conditions can include being electronically tagged and bans on using telephones and the internet. Some controllees must call in to security officials at irregular hours to prove they are at home. |
| In the key challenge of four before the Lords, six Iraqi men, one of whom is missing, had argued that their original 18-hour home curfews and other restrictions breached their fundamental rights to liberty. | |
| Three of the five Lords agreed and said the home secretary should only be able to order shorter curfews, but possibly up to 16 hours. | |
| The ruling has no practical effect on the subjects because the home secretary had already issued less restrictive orders after losing in the Court of Appeal. | |
| In a crucial victory for the home secretary, all five Law Lords agreed that the regime did not amount to a criminal punishment - and therefore did not need to abide by procedures in normal courts. | |
| Fair trial | |
| Lord Bingham, the lead Law Lord issuing opinions, said he agreed with those who had said two of the control orders had a devastating effect on the subjects and their families. | |
| In the case of MB, a Kuwaiti-born British national, and AF, a UK-Libyan, Lord Bingham said claims that they had been denied a fair trial were credible. | |
| "I have difficulty in accepting that MB has enjoyed a substantial measure of procedural justice, or that the very essence of the right to fair hearing has not been impaired," said the Lord. | |
| "The right to a fair hearing is fundamental. In the absence of derogation [opting out of human rights law] it must be protected. It seems to me that it was not." | |
| 'Few celebrations' | |
| However, stopping short of ruling the system incompatible with human rights, he said the cases needed to be referred back to the courts that originally approved the orders. | |
| Shami Chakrabarti, of human rights group Liberty which was involved in the cases, said the judgements did not solve fundamental problems with the system. | |
| "These decisions will cause few celebrations at Liberty or the Home Office, and fully satisfy neither fairness nor security," said Ms Chakrabarti. | |
| "The authorities have rightly lost their most draconian 18-hour curfews without trial. Whilst that is a body blow to Blairite policy, it is now left to the Strasbourg Court or Westminster to restore the age-old right to a fair trial." |