Blair makes terror law concessions
 | |
| |
|  VIDEO |
 Britain takes strong precautions in the war against terrorism
|
RELATED |
• Opposition mounts to UK terror law
• UK government amends terror law
|
|
LONDON, England -- UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's government has offered new -- but limited -- concessions to speed through controversial anti-terror laws, which have faced tough opposition in parliament.
Blair told the weekly prime minister's question time Wednesday his government had made key concessions to opponents by extending the role of judges in issuing control orders.
But he said further concessions would go against the advice of the police and security services.
He rejected demands for a "sunset clause" which would see the bill expire at the end of November. He also rejected raising the burden of proof so that judges were "satisfied on the balance of probabilities" before imposing the control orders.
He said it was vital to send a "clear signal" that the legislation was on the statute book to stay.
The legislation -- twice this week humiliatingly slapped down in the upper House of Lords -- strikes at the heart of the global post-September 11 debate over how far tough security measures should erode individual rights.
The government says the new control orders -- ranging from virtual house arrests through electronic tagging, curfews, bans on meeting certain people and using the Internet -- are needed to safeguard Britain from the threat of terrorism.
Bowing to pressure, Home Secretary Charles Clarke said in various TV and radio interviews Wednesday he had agreed to opposition demands that a judge be involved in all stages of issuing the orders on terrorist suspects.
He said that in the most serious situations, the home secretary, who is Britain's top law enforcement official, would have the power to detain suspects who might flee, subject to a judge's confirmation within seven days.
Clarke also said the law would have to be reviewed by the British parliament annually.
But he said he would not accept the Lords' other key demands: imposing a "sunset clause" and raising the burden of proof.
The government wants the power to impose the orders if it has "reasonable grounds" to suspect terrorist activity. The Lords say a court must be "satisfied on the balance of probabilities."
"If we have to have a higher level, it is possible that we would not be able to put control orders on some people who are, according to our understanding, a real danger to this country," Clarke said in an interview with The Guardian newspaper.
"It is perfectly obvious in this country that we face a terrorist threat of the like we have never faced before," Blair told the House of Commons.
"We need these control orders on the basis of reasonable suspicion of engagement in planning or plotting terrorist activity."
At the center of the controversy are 11 foreign terrorism suspects currently detained without trial, many at London's top-security Belmarsh prison.
Campaigners have dubbed their case "Britain's Guantanamo."
They include Abu Qatada, a Syrian cleric who Britain says was the spiritual inspiration for the lead September 11 hijacker.
If parliament fails to pass the new bill by Monday, the 11 could walk free. Clarke said even extending current powers would not prevent that.
"It's critically important that we do get the bill agreed this week," Clarke told the BBC.
The debate was stoked further at the weekend when recently retired London police chief Sir John Stevens said more than 100 "Osama bin Laden-trained terrorists" are on the streets of Britain, determined to carry out mass attacks.
Security is a paramount issue in the run-up to an expected May 5 election.
Blair is widely expected to win, but the opposition Conservatives believe they are gaining ground on issues including the proposed terrorism laws.
Copyright 2005 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Associated Press contributed to this report.
