Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
Other legislation | |
---|---|
Amended by | 2002 c. 30; 2003 c. 44; 2005 c. 2; 2006 c. 11; 2006 c. 13 |
Relates to | S.I. 2001/3644; 2002 c. 29; S.I. 2002/1822; 2003 c. 32; S.I. 2005/1071 |
Status: Amended | |
Text of statute as originally enacted | |
Revised text of statute as amended |
The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 is an
The Act was widely criticized, with one commentator describing it as "the most draconian legislation Parliament has passed in peacetime in over a century".
Part 1 (Terrorist property)
Sections 1–3, along with schedules 1 and 100, applied to the finances of suspected terrorists and terrorist organizations. They rewrote parts of the Terrorism Act 2000 relating to seizure of suspected terrorist assets.
Part 2 (Freezing orders)
This part re-enacted and widened provisions of the
Usage against Iceland
In October 2008, prime minister Gordon Brown invoked this part of the Act within the Landsbanki Freezing Order 2008 to freeze the British assets of Icelandic bank Landsbanki during the Icelandic financial crisis,[5] by virtue of the fact that the Treasury reasonably believed that "action to the detriment of the United Kingdom's economy (or part of it) has been or is likely to be taken by a person or persons".[6]
Unless explicitly stated, the short title of an Act does not limit the powers expressed within it. The Act does not say "terrorism-related action to the detriment of the United Kingdom's economy". Indeed, the government had defeated attempts to restrict Part 2 to terrorism-related cases during the passage of the Bill through the House of Lords.[7] The long title of the Act lists "to provide for the freezing of assets" as a separate item from "To amend the Terrorism Act 2000; to make further provision about terrorism and security".
Iceland's prime minister Geir Haarde protested against what he described "a terrorist law ... being applied against us", calling it "a completely unfriendly act".[8]
Part 3 (Disclosure of information)
This part gives new powers to
Part 4 (Immigration and asylum)
Part 4 allowed for the
Implementation
The
Since this measure was known to step beyond the bounds of
The derogation order came into force on 13 November 2001,[12][13] and was repealed on 8 April 2005.[14] Between those dates the government claimed that there existed in the United Kingdom a state of public emergency threatening the life of the nation, within the meaning of Article 15(1) of the ECHR.
This part was renewed by Parliament on 3 March 2003 without a vote, and on 3 March 2004 with a vote.[15][16]
Cases
This section needs to be updated.(December 2016) |
Between 2001 and 2003 sixteen foreign nationals had been detained and held using these powers at
Appeals
The Act did provide a process for appealing to a judicial tribunal against the Home Secretary's decision to detain in each case. However, the government had argued that a special appellate process was needed to deal with these appeals because of the possibility that much of the evidence or information upon which the Home Secretary's suspicions may be based was likely to be sensitive information of a confidential nature whose release to the person detained or the public might compromise intelligence methods, operatives, and other persons. Therefore, the process established by the ATCSA involved special rules of evidence which most notably permitted the exclusion of the detainees and their legal representatives from proceedings. In an attempt to ensure that their rights were safeguarded at these times, special security-vetted "special advocates" were appointed in the place of their legal representatives. However, there is some evidence that these special advocates experienced difficulties effectively protecting their interests, and two of the special advocates subsequently resigned from their positions following the December 2004 ruling of the House of Lords.
In October 2002 the Special Immigration Appeals Commission decided that the Home Secretary's derogation was lawful, and that there was indeed a "state of emergency threatening the life of the nation".
A series of legal challenges were made in respect of the powers and processes established under the ATCSA and on 16 December 2004, the
The ruling could be summed up as follows:[19]
- No detention pending deportation had lasted for more than seven days, let alone three years.
- The law was unjustifiably discriminatory. What if a British citizen was also suspected of terrorism which required that they be detained indefinitely without trial? There was no way to do it.
- There was no observable state of emergency threatening the life of the nation. No other European country which had experienced far more severe crises had declared such a state of emergency over such a long time period, and certainly without anyone noticing.
The Court quashed the order derogating from the UK's obligations under the Convention, and issued a declaration pursuant to section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 that the provisions of the ATCSA which empowered the preventative detention of non-British suspected international terrorists were incompatible with the European Convention. The effect of such a declaration in British law is not to deprive the legislation of legal effect, and Parliament may, if it wishes, refuse to repeal or amend any provision declared to be incompatible. However the making of a declaration of incompatibility carries strong moral force, and creates considerable political pressure to address the incompatibility.
Replacement of Part 4
To this end Part 4 of the ATCSA was replaced by the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 in March 2005. This Act replaces detention in prison with "control orders" which allow for the imposition of an extensive and non-exhaustive set of conditions on the movements of the suspected person with restrictions approaching a form of house arrest.
Unlike Part 4 of the ATCSA, the powers in the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 can be applied to British and non-British suspected terrorists alike. At the time of its enactment there was considerable debate as to the compatibility of this Act's provisions with domestic and international human rights laws.
Eleven control orders were issued on the night the act passed on 11 March 2005 against the terrorist suspects who were due to be released. By October of that year only three were still in force.
Part 5 (Racial hatred)
This part substitutes "racially aggravated" with "racially or religiously aggravated" in some parts of the criminal law.
Parts 6–8 (Weapons of mass destruction)
This part makes it illegal to deal in
Part 9 (Aircraft security)
This part allows for the Secretary of State to make new regulations, and for the detention of aircraft where there is suspicion of an act of violence against a person on the aircraft.
Part 10 (Police powers)
This part allows the police to forcefully obtain fingerprints and other identifying features from an individual to ascertain their identity, and for the
Part 11 (Retention of communications data)
This part creates wide powers for the Secretary of State to regulate telephone companies and internet providers to
Part 12 (Bribery and corruption)
This part extends the laws against bribery to cases where "functions of the person who receives or is offered a reward have no connection with the United Kingdom and are carried out in a country or territory outside the United Kingdom". It extends the laws against corruption so as to make prosecutions possible for "act[s that] would, if done in the United Kingdom, constitute a corruption offence". The definitions of corruption offences are in Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 and Prevention of Corruption Act 1906.
The
Part 13 (Miscellaneous)
This part gives the Secretary of State the power to implement the
Part 14 (Supplemental)
This part outlines the timetable for the review of the Act by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation.
See also
- Civil liberties in the United Kingdom
- Human rights in the United Kingdom
- Taking Liberties (film)
- Terrorism Acts in the United Kingdom
- Anti-terrorism
- Patriot Act, a sweeping anti-terrorism law passed in the United States around the same time
References
- ^ "House of Commons - Home Affairs - First Report". publications.parliament.uk. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- ^ Tomkins (2002) 'Legislating Against Terror: The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001' Public Law 205-20
- ^ 1964 c. 60.
- ^ SRO 1939/927.
- The Economist. p. 5. Retrieved 26 March 2020.
- ^ "Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 - Section 4 - Power to make an order". OPSI. Archived from the original on 18 October 2008.
- ^ House of Lords Debates 28 November 2001, cc. 348–59.
- ^ Patrick Wintour and Audrey Gillan:Lost in Iceland: £1 billion from councils, charities and police The Guardian, October 10, 2008
- ^ "Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001". Archived from the original on 13 July 2006. Retrieved 5 July 2006.
- ^ "Terror detainees win Lords appeal". BBC News. 16 December 2004. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
- ^ Section 30 Archived July 13, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ "The Human Rights Act 1998 (Designated Derogation) Order 2001". Archived from the original on 26 February 2007. Retrieved 5 July 2006.
- ^ "The Human Rights Act 1998 (Amendment No. 2)Order 2001". Archived from the original on 25 October 2006. Retrieved 5 July 2006.
- ^ "The Human Rights Act 1998 (Amendment) Order 2005". Archived from the original on 14 September 2006. Retrieved 5 July 2006.
- ^ "Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism". TheyWorkForYou. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- ^ "The Public Whip — Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 — Renewal of indefinite detention - 3 Mar 2004 at 19:50". www.publicwhip.org.uk. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- ^ "Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (Detentions)". TheyWorkForYou. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- ^ "European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT)". www.coe.int. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- ^ "House of Lords - A (FC) and others (FC) (Appellants) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)". publications.parliament.uk. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
- .
External links
- Official text of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from the UK Statute Law Database
- Explanatory Note to the Bill as introduced in the House of Commons
- Table containing House of Commons votes from the Public Whip
- Belmarsh — Britain's Guantanamo Bay?, BBC News Online, 6 October 2004
- Terror lawyers criticise system, BBC News Online, 13 December 2004
- Terror detainees win Lords appeal, BBC News Online, 16 December 2004
- House of Lords Judgments: A (FC) and others (FC) (Appellants) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)