Defending "freedom"

Emma Sangster

You could be forgiven for thinking that the new Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), the result of an almost unprecedented to and fro between the Commons and Lords, is a much-watered down version of the Government's proposals for the replacement of the heavily criticised detention powers in the Anti-T errorism, Crime and Security Act.
But the parliamentary tussles perhaps tell us more about theshortcomings of most W estminster debates than about anyactual gains made by defenders of civil liberties in this case.

Punishment without trial

What then was the result of 30 hours of debate and back-roomnegotiation?
    British, as well as foreign,nationals now face the possibility of criminal penalties on thebasis of suspicion before a crime has been committed, and per -mission was given for the UK to derogate from the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights in order to allow house arrest.
    Then there are the "non-dero gating" control orders, whichconstitute a virtual state of imprisonment without trial.These are gross intrusions on normal life which, by restrictingbasic freedoms without the due process of law, are also a deroga -tion from human rights law.
    Two (minor) concessions werewon from the government--a review of the Act after a yearand the involvement of the courts. However, the processwill only be one of judicial review and, as it was the judici -ary that incarcerated the detainees at Belmarsh for overthree and a half years, this does not seem much of a safeguard.
    A control order can be issuedif there are "reasonable grounds for suspecting" involvement in"terrorist-related activity". The individual in question will neversee the evidence against them and, with the definition of ter -rorism as broad as it is (includ ing trying to "influence the gov -ernment" and "advancing a political, religious or ideologicalcause"), it will be tempting for the government to use morecontrol orders, especially if there is thought to be less hostility tothem than imprisonment.
    To shore up its argument, thegovernment claimed that many tens of terrorists are living inBritain. Does this mean that their anti-terror policy hascompletely failed or that we will see a huge increase inarrests? It is more likely that this announcement is just thelatest in a series of security alerts designed to increase theclimate of fear.

The logic of control orders

This control order mentality is being increasingly legislatedinto being, most recently in "anti-social behaviour" and"right to protest" laws. People are criminalised, not for whatthey are alleged to be doing, but for breaching laws which aredesigned to limit that activity.
While those under the PT Acontrol orders are not to be tried on their supposed "terror -ist-related activity", if they breach the unworkable controlorders, they can be tried and imprisoned for this new offence.The growing use of control laws replaces rights with permissionsand creates its own climate of fear, self-censorship and erasureof dissent.

Control or chaos?

The foreign detainees have been subject to a particularly chaotic and distressing "process" sincetheir release in March. The gen eral confusion about the work -ings of the control orders left the men in difficult circumstances.
    The Home Office number which they are to call to arrangevisits etc is only operating in office hours and is neveranswered anyway. Similarly, the tagging company, which needsto be contacted regularly, cannot deal with accented voices. V ari-ous detainees were left without food, money or access to familymembers and their children' s friends were unable to visit.
    Their solicitors say that the men are isolated and worriedthat they will be arrested for breaking the unworkableorders. Their lawyers are preparing a legal challenge to them.
    So much damage has been, and continues to be, done.Three of the detainees have suf fered severe psychiatric prob -lems, including an attempt at suicide, since their release. Justas the original PT A (1974) cre ated the conditions for furtherharassment of Irish people, this new version, by creating speciallegislation on the back of 9/11, has subjected Muslim and otherminority communities to simi lar treatment.
    The British government should consider if it reallywants to team up with authori tarian regimes around theworld with similar laws or join those nations again where free -doms are not sacrificed to defend "freedom".

Emma Sangster is a regular Peace News contributor.
Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (http://www.cacc.org.uk/ ) will be assisting in setting up visits with the effected families as a challenge to the control orders and the stigma they create.