ŠA deep and thoughtful exploration of counter-terrorism written by leading commentators from around the globe. This book poses critical questions about the definition of terrorism, the role of human rights and the push by many governments for more secu

Taking as a starting point the widely accepted view that states confronted with terrorism must find a proper equilibrium between their respective obligations of preserving fundamental rights and fighting terrorism effectively, this book seeks to demonstrate how the design and enforcement of a human rights instrument may influence the result of that exercise. An attempt is made to answer the question how a legal order's approach to the limitation of rights may shape decision-making trade-offs between the demands of liberty and the need to guarantee individual and collective security. In doing so, special attention is given to the difference between the adjudicative methods of balancing and categorisation. The book challenges the conventional wisdom that individual rights, in times of crisis, are better served by the application of categorical rather than flexible models of limitation. In addition, the work considers the impact of a variety of other factors, including the discrepancies in enforcing an international convention as opposed to a national constitution and the use of emergency provisions permitting derogations from human rights obligations in time of war or a public emergency. The research questions are addressed through a comparative study of the terrorism-related restrictions on five fundamental rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and the United States Constitution: the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of association, the right to personal liberty, the right to privacy, and the right to a fair trial. The book offers both a theoretical account of the paradoxical relationship between terrorism and human rights and a comprehensive comparative survey of the major decisions of the highest courts on both sides of the Atlantic.

Terrorism has become one of the major threats facing both states and the international community, in particular after the terrorist attacks in the United States, Madrid and London, which revealed a whole new scale and dimension of the phenomenon. An effective response is absolutely necessary; this response, however, cannot undermine democracy, human rights, the rule of law or the supreme values inherent to these principles.There is no universally agreed definition of "terrorism", nor is there an international Jurisdiction before which the perpetrators of terrorist crimes can be brought to account. The European Court of Human Rights is the first international Jurisdiction to deal with such a phenomenon. For many decades and through more than four hundred cases, it has elaborated a clear, integrated and articulated body of case law on responses to terrorism from a human rights and rule of law perspective. Thus, this is a handbook on counter-terrorism with a special focus on due respect for human rights and rule of law.This book compiles the doctrine laid down by the European Court of Human Rights in this field with a view to facilitating the task of adjudicators, legal officers, lawyers, international IGOs, NGOs, policy makers, researchers, victims and all those committed to fighting this scourge. The book presents a careful analysis of this body of case law and the general principles applicable to the fight against terrorism resulting from each particular case. It also includes a compendium of the main cases dealt with by the Strasbourg Court in this field and will prove to be a most useful guiding tool in the sensitive area of counter-terrorism and human rights.

While providing a substantive legal analysis of the links between human rights and counter-terrorism, this book provides the tools to successfully argue that a human rights approach does not undermine the fight against terrorism. Through practical examples, it shows that a State’s lack of respect for human rights hinders its fight against terrorism and can be counter-productive. The contributing experts represent a wide breadth of experience at the national and international levels, and bring their unique approach to each cross-cutting topic.

This book considers the theoretical, policy and empirical arguments relevant to the debate concerning the legalisation of interrogational torture. Torturing Terrorists examines, as part of a consequentialist analysis, the nature and impact of torture and the implications of its legal regulation on individuals, institutions and wider society. In making an argument against the use of torture, the book engages in a wide ranging interdisciplinary analysis of the arguments and claims that are put forward by the proponents and opponents of legalised torture. This book examines the ticking bomb hypothetical and explains how the component parts of the hypothetical are expansively interpreted in theory and practice. It also considers the effectiveness of torture in producing ‘ticking bomb’ and ‘infrastructure’ intelligence and examines the use of interrogational torture and coercion by state officials in Northern Ireland, Algeria, Israel, and as part of the CIA’s ‘High Value Detainee’ interrogation programme. As part of an empirical slippery slope argument, this book examines the difficulties in drafting the text of a torture statute; the difficulties of controlling the use of interrogational torture and problems such a law could create for state officials and wider society. Finally, it critically evaluates suggestions that debating the legalisation of torture is dangerous and should be avoided. The book will be of interest to students and academics of criminology, law, sociology and philosophy, as well as the general reader.

The fundamental right to privacy, in the sense of non-interference by government, is protected by international and national law. Nonetheless, today the laws of privacy are being stretched to their limits and even violated by governments in the name of security. This book, by one of Europe’s most trusted authorities on the legal aspects of telecommunications technology, analyses the use of legal instruments by government agencies to determine if they restrict the fundamental right of privacy and if the grounds to do so are acceptable within a democratic society. Unpacking the complexity of the various factors on each side – privacy and the general interest of safety – the author clearly describes the relevant tensions in the following major areas of current law: – data protection regulations; – regulations on interception and retention of personal data in the telecommunication sector; – anti–money laundering; and – strategies used to protect national security against terrorist activities. The analysis pays detailed attention to the relevant provisions of international and regional conventions, to deliberated principles and guidelines, and to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and other courts at every level. Legal theories of sovereignty are also taken into account. This is the most thorough treatment available of the grounds and circumstances that state agencies invoke to intrude upon citizens’ rights of privacy and the procedures in place to legitimize these intrusions. Its ultimate contribution – the setting forth of a set of circumstances under which the limitation of privacy should be allowed, including a consideration of what principles and conditions should underpin this policy – will prove of inestimable value to policymakers, government institutions, and practitioners in several fi elds related to human rights. Robert van den Hoven van Genderen has worked as a legal expert on telecommunications technology, regulation of the Internet, and anti–money laundering measures in both public and private sectors, in addition to legal and academic practice.

In recent years, there has been much controversy about the proper forum in which to prosecute and punish suspected terrorists. Some have endorsed aggressive use of military commissions; others have proposed an entirely new "national security court." However, as the nation strives for a vigorous and effective response to terrorism, we should not lose sight of the important tools that are already at our disposal, nor should we forget the costs and risks of seeking to break new ground by departing from established institutions and practices. As this White Paper shows, the existing criminal justice system has proved successful at handling a large number of important and challenging terrorism prosecutions over the past fifteen years-without sacrificing national security interests, rigorous standards of fairness and due process, or just punishment for those guilty of terrorism-related crimes.