What are the effects of UK anti-terrorism laws on human rights and are these justified in ensuring national security?
Within the last decade, research has contributed to understanding the effects of anti-terrorism laws. It is at the forefront of current legislation and is a topic of debate as in recent years the laws put in place to protect national security in the UK have changed drastically when compared to pre-9/11. This literature review will contribute to current research by looking at the effects UK Anti-terrorism laws have had on human rights and whether these laws can be justified through protecting the public from acts of terrorism. To come to a conclusion I will be outlining what forms of terrorism are covered by the laws implemented by the UK legal system and how these may over-lap human rights.
The definition of terrorism has proved to be controversial as there are over a hundred possible definitions of terrorism (Hewitt, 2008). However the present definition used in UK legal systems can be found in the Terrorism Act, 2000 which states terrorism is “The use or threat of action designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public” through several means such as violence, threat and interference (Loughnane, 2012). What acts fall under the definition has been lengthened over the years.
The events of 9/11 led to a “war on terror” as former US President George Bush described it at the time, but questions have been raised as to whether the global war on terror is a productive response to terrorism (Mockaitis, 2008). Chomsky, (1991) suggests that there are two ways to approach the study of terrorism and that the propagandistic approach is usually used by governments because when societies feel at threat, gover...
... middle of paper ...
...w.cps.org.uk
OSCE. (2007). Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights. [ONLINE]. [Accessed: 15th Mar 2014]. Available at: http://www.osce.org
Peirce, G. (2010). The Terrorism Act 2000: an interview with Gareth Peirce. [ONLINE]. Available at: http://statecrime.org
Raab, D. (2010). Sacrificing our liberties won’t win the war against terror. Telegraph. 25th Oct. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk
Risks and Choices for Human Rights Organisations. Vernier: ATAR Roto Press.
Spencer, S. (2013). London mayor: “it is completely wrong to blame this killing on Islam”. [Accessed: 20th April 2014]. Available at: http://www.jihadwatch.org
Warbrick, C. (2004). The European Response to Terrorism in an Age of Human Rights. The European Journal of International Law. Vol. 15 no.5.
Wilkinson, P. (2006). Terrorism versus Democracy. 2nd Edition. London: Routledge.
In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.
Cole, D., & Dempsey, J. X. (2006). Terrorism and the constitution: sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security. New York: New Press.
In “Four Human Rights Myths” Susan Marks discusses several conceptions (or misconceptions according to her) about human rights. She begins her paper with a case study of the 2011 London riots and how distinctively different is their coverage by the British prime minister and two scholars.
Retrieved from http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/268/540 White, J. R. (2014). Terrorism and homeland security (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
In today’s society the word “terrorism” has gone global. We see this term on television, in magazines and even from other people speaking of it. In their essay “Controlling Irrational Fears After 9/11”, published in 2002, Clark R. Chapman and Alan W. Harris argue that the reaction of the American officials, people and the media after the attacks of 9/11 was completely irrational due to the simple fact of fear. Chapman and Harris jump right into dismembering the irrational argument, often experienced with relationships and our personal analysis. They express how this argument came about from the terrorist being able to succeed in “achieving one major goal, which was spreading fear” among the American people (Chapman & Harris, para.1). The supporters of the irrational reaction argument state that because “Americans unwittingly cooperated with the terrorist in achieving the major goal”, the result was a widespread of disrupted lives of the Americans and if this reaction had been more rational then there would have been “less disruption in the lives of our citizens” (Chapman & Harris, para. 1).
The Human Rights Act of 1998 was co-founded upon the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. Developed following the ending of the Second World War, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was constructed to further the idealistic principles and endeavours of equality among all human beings, as well as a devout declaration of preventing the reoccurrence of the holocaust and massacres which have occurred as a casus belli . ECHR comprises civil privileges and liberties fundamental to all human beings irrespective of race, gender, age, sexual orientation exclusive of discrimination. The UK government have promptly endorsed the ECHR, recognising the need of ...
Spalek and Imtoual (2007) state that in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 and the following of subsequent terrorist attacks in the UK and Europe, there has been a shift of focus on black minorities to Asian minorities and as a result there has been an increased surveillance amongst Asian and Muslim minority groups. Since the year 2000, numerous contemporary anti-terror laws have been instated the law affecting minority groups the most being most influential the Terrorism Act 2000. The Terrorism Act 2000 affected minority groups by enhancing police powers to investigate terrorism, including wider stop and search powers, and the power to detain suspects after arrest for up to 14 days. (Spalek and Imtoual, 2007). As a result, statistics in Britain in 2002-2003, sugested that under counter-terrorism legislation, stop and searches carried out amongst Asian minorities increased by 302% in a year, in which Hare and Weinstein (2010, p.483) in their literary research on democracy, state that the Muslim Council of Britain claimed that the police are misusing their new enhanced powers and
The Irish Republican Army during the 1970’s were responsible for various bombings in England; that lead to the creation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act in 1974. The Prevention of Terrorism Act made “membership of and support for the IRA an offense” (p.47). It also gave the British government the power to arrest and restrict citizens and detain them for forty-eight hours- five days by extension even with sufficient evidence. This lead to the arrest of Paul Hill, Gerard Conlon Patrick Armstrong and Carole Richardson. Unlike the Norfolk four, these individuals were subjected to harsher treatments due to the nature of the crime and recent passing of the terrorist bill. For example, while the Norfolk four weren’t physically harmed, the Guildford
"Terrorism and Civil Liberty: Is Torture Ever Justified? | The Economist." The Economist - World
Herman, E. & Sullivan, G. O.1989. The Terrorism Industry: The Experts and Institutions That Shape Our View of Terror. New York: Pantheon.
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
One of the many details shown is that mass surveillance has not had an apparent impact on the prevention of terrorism (Greenwald, 2013). Most of the information gathered has not been used to impede a terrorist attack. Surveillance does not protect the rights to life, property and so on from being violated by terrorists. However it gives the citizen...
The concept of terrorism is exceedingly difficult to define. Author Gerald Seymour first said in his book Harry’s Game that, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Each individual may view terrorism in a different light. Because of this, there is currently no universal definition of terrorism. However, in recent years, it has become increasingly more important to form a definition of terrorism, especially while working in the media.
Terrorist organizations have been committing atrocities against innocent civilians throughout the world for hundreds of years. Terrorism has evolved in many different forms and from various motivations such as religious protest movements, political revolts, and social uprisings. Regardless of the motives for terror, the problem is the financing of terrorism and terrorist organizations themselves. Recent global terrorist attacks using high technology and extensive networks have shown that money is essential to provide the means behind all terrorist activities. Individual terrorists plan terrorist operations and require resources to live, prepare, and implement their plans. The use of money laundering and financial support schemes are the root of the cause. If money laundering were curtailed or even eliminated, and financial supporters of terrorism were identified terrorism would decrease dramatically. To achieve these goals would take monumental efforts. The United States, United Nations and all sovereign nations would need to take cooperative action that has never been accomplished. Terrorism, its' history, concepts, reasoning, methods, and financial roots are object of this research.
In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human rights were devised (UDHR). Everyone has the right to liberty, life, freedom from fear and violence. The obligation to protect individuals and groups the States is required to shield them against human rights abuses (United Nations 2013) The Human Rights Act became effective in the UK in 2000. The purpose of the Human Rights Act is t...