Britain defends tough terror laws
 |
Many Labour MPs are uneasy about the tough new terror laws.
Story Tools
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
|
Follow the news that matters to you. Create your own alert to be notified on topics you're interested in.
Or, visit Popular Alerts for suggestions.
|
|
LONDON, England (Reuters) -- The UK government has thrown open to public debate plans to introduce a new slate of tough anti-terror laws and insisted that measures already in place should not be diluted.
It was also due to confirm later on Wednesday plans to recruit 1,000 new staff for counter-intelligence service MI5 to help combat terrorism.
Home Secretary David Blunkett said he would seek to strike a balance between security and liberty.
He announced a six-month consultation process before any decisions are taken but added: "We need to consider whether adequate powers are available to deal with all terror suspects irrespective of their nationality."
In a discussion paper, he argued that Britain must retain the right to detain indefinitely without trial foreign nationals it considered to be terror threats.
The controversial powers were part of Britain's Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act, passed in 2001 in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States.
They will expire in 2006 if not legislated on afresh.
The government's massive majority should ensure the measure is renewed when the time comes, but many Labour MPs are uneasy.
A cross-party committee of senior parliamentarians -- set up by the government to scrutinize the workings of the act -- demanded late last year that they be revoked much sooner.
The committee's report will be debated later on Wednesday.
"The government believes that these powers continue to be an essential part or our defenses against attack," Blunkett said.
But he ruled out extending them to British citizens.
Rights concerns
Fourteen foreign nationals have been held without charge or trial in Britain, some for over two years, on suspicion of being linked to militant organizations.
Pressure groups say their treatment is inhumane and contravenes European human rights legislation.
"We have real concerns whether we are undermining the very democracy that we are supposed to be protecting," said Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights group Liberty.
The parliamentary committee said that rather than face indefinite incarceration, suspects should be monitored more closely by security services and courts should be able to admit information gleaned from bugging and phone tapping as evidence.
Blunkett, an uncompromising hardliner, appears to want those powers as well as, not instead of, the right to hold suspects.
"We are currently reviewing whether some intercept evidence could be made available to support a prosecution in certain cases," he said.
The government has also floated the idea of lowering the standard of proof required to help secure convictions in terror cases. Blunkett's paper did not rule that in or out.
Copyright 2004
Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
