High Court Throws Out Blair’s Control Orders

Mr. Justice Sullivan in the High Court threw out one of the pillars of Prime Minister Blair’s anti-terror laws. He held that the Home Secretary has no power or authority to issue control orders, which is just short of house arrest. The Appeal Court could rule as soon as Monday, and one can only hope the Sullivan decision is upheld. Britons still have rights.

Quite simply, the control orders violate Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to Mr. Justice Sullivan. That article forbids detention without trial, which enlightened persons agree is contrary to any sort of justice beyond the most primitive. Since the orders violate that bit of international law, he ruled “It follows that the [Home Secretary] had no power to make the orders and they must therefore all be quashed.” This is the same judge who said in April that control orders were an “affront to justice.” Should he ever wish to emigrate, one hopes America will find him a bench from which to do his judging.

Naturally, the Blair government, which has always had a bit of an authoritarian streak in it, is miffed. Control orders came about in February 2005 after a December 2004 ruling from the law lords that said holding terror suspects without charge or trial was unlawful – the IRA never had to put up with that. Home Secretary John Reid, who just got the job in a reshuffle, said, “The obligations contained in control orders are necessary to protect the public and proportionate to the threat that these individuals pose.” Perhaps, but one would like to see that assertion proved, in a court of law, which rather undoes the whole control order idea.

The opposition parties are having a field day. David Davis, Tory Shadow Home Secretary, said, “When control orders were first debated we warned the Government that exactly this might happen, and explicitly offered them the option of extending the time limit on the old legislation, specifically to give them time to think.” Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said, “This decision shows the dangers of rushed and ill thought out legislation on such an important issue.”

Shami Chakrabarti of the human rights group Liberty told the Guardian that the orders were a “substitute long-term punishment based on secret intelligence for charges, evidence and proof. This kind of injustice is counter-productive in fighting terrorism.” Mr. Blair called the ruling an “abuse of common sense.” Surely, it is time for him to go.

© Copyright 2006 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home