(In)security in the Heartland of Liberal Democracy: An Account of Counter-terrorism Laws and Human Rights in the UK

Author(s):  
Ipek Demirsu
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister

<p>Inspired by the recently concluded litigation seeking to deport the radical Islamic preacher Abu Qatada from the UK to Jordan, this paper aims at examining the 2012 judgment of the ECtHR by focusing on the question under which circumstances a deportation with diplomatic assurances (DWA) may be permissible under the European Convention on Human Rights. Relevant background information will be provided concerning the interplay of the use of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights as well as concerning the particular circumstances that led to the ECtHR’s ruling in Abu Qatada. In the following analysis of the judgment, the focus will be on the interplay of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights with special regard to art 3 and art 6 of the Convention. Finally, the impact of this judgment on the future jurisprudence and the DWA policy will be shown. In the light of this judgment, it will be argued that the counter terrorism means of deporting a non-national terrorist suspect with diplomatic assurances seems to be compatible with the Convention if the diplomatic assurances given guarantee a sufficient protection of the human rights of the transferee, which due to the uncertain effects of the DWA policy, still has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.</p>


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daragh Murray

As a result of the ‘War on Terror’ domestic governments and the international community have paid increasing attention to counter-terrorism legislation. Given the meteoric rise in prominence of the Internet, and the ever-expanding ‘terrorist’ use of this entity, it is unsurprising that the Internet has now become the focus of legislative attention. However, what does this mean for one of the most fundamental of human rights, the right to freedom of expression? This article will analyse the concepts of incitement, glorification and dissemination as they relate to the Internet, and evaluate their place within the broader framework of the right to freedom of expression. Consequently, ‘context’, the quantifiable circulation of content, and other relevant issues are evaluated through the prism of the Internet. Similarly, the role of the ‘blogger’ is discussed as it relates to the dissemination of information, and the overarching concept of participatory democracy. For illustrative purposes, the United Kingdom's Terrorist Act 2006, and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights will be of primary interest.


2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 658-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ipek Demirsu

Abstract This article addresses the question of how draconian counter-terrorism policies are legitimized in long-established democracies. Being the heartland of liberal rights, the UK comes to the fore as a striking case where some of the most controversial security policies have been enacted. The study undertakes a systematic frame analysis of UK parliamentary debates with the help of ATLAS.ti, which allows the analyst to trace and map out recurrent concepts, themes, and arguments as well as their overall distribution. While demonstrating the workings of securitization in the formulation of key counter-terrorism legislation, the study unearths how the security narrative in the UK context evidently relies on the language of rights in invoking legitimacy. The study suggests that far from negating the indispensable status of human rights, security narrative resorts to the latter’s moral power and mimics rights language, heralding the weight of these international norms even in hard-core security matters.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister

<p>Inspired by the recently concluded litigation seeking to deport the radical Islamic preacher Abu Qatada from the UK to Jordan, this paper aims at examining the 2012 judgment of the ECtHR by focusing on the question under which circumstances a deportation with diplomatic assurances (DWA) may be permissible under the European Convention on Human Rights. Relevant background information will be provided concerning the interplay of the use of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights as well as concerning the particular circumstances that led to the ECtHR’s ruling in Abu Qatada. In the following analysis of the judgment, the focus will be on the interplay of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights with special regard to art 3 and art 6 of the Convention. Finally, the impact of this judgment on the future jurisprudence and the DWA policy will be shown. In the light of this judgment, it will be argued that the counter terrorism means of deporting a non-national terrorist suspect with diplomatic assurances seems to be compatible with the Convention if the diplomatic assurances given guarantee a sufficient protection of the human rights of the transferee, which due to the uncertain effects of the DWA policy, still has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-235
Author(s):  
Michele Sciurba

The duties of loyalty and confidentiality are central to the relationship between banks and their customers. In the wake of national and international security concerns, Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorism Financing (CTF) legislation have put banks at risk for excessive sanctions and legal liability for failing to comply with these laws. In response, banks have adopted de-risking policies that undermine the banks’ confidential relationship to their customers. In order to limit their own risk, banks act pre-emptively by denying accounts to customers or terminate existing accounts of legitimate customers based on risk profiles. Consequently, banks become de facto extensions of law enforcement. This provides incentives to banks to discriminate against entire groups of customers and to dispense with less profitable customers in the name of mitigating risk. The risk-profiling policies of banks raise civic and human rights concerns, which extend beyond the private relationship between the bank and its customer.


Author(s):  
Kevin Vallier

Americans today don’t trust each other and their institutions as much as they used to. The collapse of social and political trust arguably has fueled our increasingly ferocious ideological conflicts and hardened partisanship. But is the decline in trust inevitable? Are we caught in a downward spiral that must end in war-like politics, institutional decay, and possibly even civil war? This book argues that American political and economic institutions are capable of creating and maintaining trust, even through polarized times. Combining philosophical arguments and empirical data, the author shows that liberal democracy, markets, and social welfare programs all play a vital role in producing social and political trust. Even more, these institutions can promote trust justly, by recognizing and respecting our basic human rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document