Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T18:22:54.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Terrorism and Human Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Conor Gearty
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the formal invocation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, much global discourse has been shaped by those principles, to the extent that one could without exaggeration describe the period as an ‘age of human rights’. But will and indeed can that survive the perceived danger arising from violent acts of terrorism? Is this now an ‘age of terrorism’– or at least, an ‘age of counter-terrorism’– in which human rights are being accorded a secondary status? This article considers those contentions and also advocates particular roles for those who work in the human rights field.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , 2007 , pp. 340 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Department of Constitutional Affairs, Review of the Implementation of the Human Rights Act, London, Lord Chancellor's Department, 2006.Google Scholar

2 Most famously A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, which led to the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.Google Scholar

3 For the general background see C. A. Gearty and J. A. Kimbell, Terrorism and the Rule of Law, London, Civil Liberties Research Unit, King's College London, 1995.Google Scholar

4 Stella Rimington and Ian Blair respectively. The Treasurer Gordon Brown also engaged with the subject at the same time: see ‘Brown Backs Call to Extend 28-Day Limit on Detention’, Guardian, 13 November 2006, p. 1, where there are also reports on the other interventions.Google Scholar

5 For a general review of the law and practice in the area, see Gearty, C. A., ‘11 September 2001, Counter-Terrorism and the Human Rights Act’, Journal of Law and Society, 32 (2005), p. 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 For two excellent studies of the tensions caused by this assumption see U. Baxi, The Future of Human Rights, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2002, and C. Douzinas, The End of Human Rights, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2000.Google Scholar

7 See further C. A. Gearty, Can Human Rights Survive?, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

8 1577 UNTS 3 (1989).Google Scholar

9 UN Doc A/811 (10 December 1948).Google Scholar

10 See A. W. B. Simpson, Human Rights and the End of Empire. Britain and the Genesis of the European Convention, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001, and K. Sellars, The Rise and Rise of Human Rights, Stroud, Sutton Publishing, 2002.Google Scholar

11 J. Dunn, Locke: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003, is a good summary.Google Scholar

12 See Article 1.1 of both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 993 UNTS 3 (1966) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 999 UNTS 171 (1966).Google Scholar

13 Fascinating on this is Mandel, M., ‘A Brief History of the New Constitutionalism, or “How We Changed Everything so that Everything Would Remain the Same”’, Israel Law Review, 32 (1998), p. 250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Noting immediately that the collapse of the Soviet Union was due to many factors, this being only one of them.Google Scholar

15 N. Bobbio, The Age of Rights, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1996.Google Scholar

16 For a good example of the genre, see Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Human Rights Report 2005 (Cm 6606), London, Stationery Office, 2005.Google Scholar

17 See A. Williams, EU Human Rights Policies: A Study in Irony, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

18 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam 1990; Arab Charter on Human Rights 1994.Google Scholar

19 Since 1994, the Constitution states: ‘The State respects and protects human rights’.Google Scholar

20 The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights 1981, and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights 1998, respectively.Google Scholar

21 Notably the American Convention on Human Rights 1969.Google Scholar

22 A point the Chinese make much of in their annual review of the human rights record of the United States: see the report for 2004 published by the Information Office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China, 3 March 2005, available at http://english.people.com.cn/200503/03/eng200503_175406.html.Google Scholar

23 www.icj.org.Google Scholar

24 It is too early for a comprehensive comparative treatment. Two excellent books with a broader range are R. A. Wilson (ed.), Human Rights in the ‘War on Terror’, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005, and H. Duffy, The ‘War on Terror’ and the Framework of International Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

25 An outstanding example of engaged scholarship with a human rights dimension, albeit also with a broader remit, is J. Rehman, Islamic State Practices, International Law and the Threat from Terrorism, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2005.Google Scholar

26 The law restricting spouses is the Nationality and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) (Amendment) 2005. For the controversy over the detention legislation, see International Commission of Jurists, ‘E-Bulletin on Terrorism and Human Rights’, 12 (June 2006), p. 3, available at www.icj.org.Google Scholar

27 See www.icj.org.Google Scholar

28 See for a general flavour of this kind of literature B. Netanyahu, Terrorism: How the West Can Win, London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1986. The point is dealt with at length in C. A. Gearty, ‘Human Rights in an Age of Counter-Terrorism’, Oxford Amnesty Lecture held on 23 February 2006, text available at www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/human-rights/ under index of documents.Google Scholar

29 See, for example, M. Ignatieff, The Lesser Evil. Political Ethics in an Age of Terror, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

30 A. M. Dershowitz, Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

31 Oberleitner, G., ‘A Just War Against Terror’, Peace Review, 16 (2004), p. 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 Gearty, C. A., ‘With a Little Help from Our Friends’, Index on Censorship, 34 (2005), p. 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 Huntington, S., ‘The Clash of Civilizations’, Foreign Affairs, 72 (1993), p. 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 See T. Blair, ‘Not a Clash Between Civilizations but a Clash About Civilization’, speech to the Foreign Policy Centre and Reuters, 21 March 2006.Google Scholar

35 See the speech by the Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer of Thornton in Sydney on 13 September 2006, on ‘The Role of Judges in a Modern Democracy’ in which he condemned the detentions in Guantanamo as a ‘shocking … affront to the principles of democracy’, available at www.dca.gov.uk/speeches/2006/sp060913.htm.Google Scholar

36 See the speech by the Secretary of State for the Home Department Dr J. Reid at Demos in September 2006, ‘Security, Freedom and the Protection of our Values’, available at www.labour.org.uk.Google Scholar

37 Ibid.Google Scholar

38 For one among many examples see the comments reportedly made about the likelihood that judicial proceedings would be ignored in relation to the deportation of persons to Iraq: Guardian, 5 September 2006, p. 1.Google Scholar

39 Chahal v United Kingdom (1996) 23 EHRR 413.Google Scholar

40 Soering v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439.Google Scholar

41 Ramzy v Netherlands.Google Scholar

42 Now assisted by an excellent report, Human Rights Watch, Dangerous Ambivalence. UK Policy on Torture Since 9/11, London, Human Rights Watch, 2006.Google Scholar

43 [2006] EWCA Civ 1078.Google Scholar

44 R(Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence [2005] EWCA Civ 1609.Google Scholar

45 Apart from in Northern Ireland, of course, but the colonial analogy never worked there, the six counties that made up the British section of the province of Ulster being part of the UK as a matter of constitutional law; [2006] EWCA Civ 1190.Google Scholar

46 A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) [2005] UKHL 71. Their lordships considered that immediate administrative actions to divert catastrophe could be legitimately undertaken, even where the source of the information that underpinned the action might have been contaminated by suspicions of torture.Google Scholar

47 Terrorism Act 2000, section 1.Google Scholar

48 Sections 59–61.Google Scholar

49 Terrorism Act 2000, part 2.Google Scholar

50 See Gearty and Kimbell, Terrorism and the Rule of Law for a flavour of the discussion in the 1980s and early 1990s.Google Scholar

51 Terrorism Act 2000, secton 5, schedule 3.Google Scholar

52 K. D. Ewing and C. A. Gearty, Freedom under Thatcher. Civil Liberties in Modern Britain, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990, pp. 241–50.Google Scholar

53 Section 1.Google Scholar

54 Part 4.Google Scholar

55 A v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2004] UKHL 56. For more details see Gearty, C. A., ‘Human Rights in an Age of Counter-Terrorism: Injurious, Irrelevant or Indispensable?’, Current Legal Problems, 58 (2005), p. 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

56 Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.Google Scholar

57 See Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB [2006] EWCA Civ 1140; Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ [2006] EWCA Civ 1141.Google Scholar

58 Compare R (Singh) v Chief Constable of the West Midlands [2006] EWCA Civ 1118.Google Scholar

59 These points are further developed in Gearty, Can Human Rights Survive?.Google Scholar