The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Anti-terrorism control orders: liberty and security still in the balance

Anti-terrorism control orders: liberty and security still in the balance
Anti-terrorism control orders: liberty and security still in the balance
The compatibility of anti-terrorism control orders with Arts 5 and 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 was the subject of litigation culminating in three House of Lords' judgments in late 2007, and a further case on Art 6 will be argued before a nine-panel House of Lords in March 2009. To date, the litigation has required important modifications to be made to how control orders work, but the regime provided by the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 remains essentially intact. The government therefore claims that control orders strike an appropriate balance between the interests of liberty and security. This paper critiques the role played by the courts in challenging control orders under human rights laws. It argues that it is necessary to incorporate the right to freedom of movement into UK law in order to allow a proper balance between liberty and security to be effected by the courts
0261-3875
99-126
Bates, Ed
eb13de81-a252-429c-8975-169e2e5e39ad
Bates, Ed
eb13de81-a252-429c-8975-169e2e5e39ad

Bates, Ed (2009) Anti-terrorism control orders: liberty and security still in the balance. Legal Studies, 29 (1), 99-126. (doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2008.00118.x).

Record type: Article

Abstract

The compatibility of anti-terrorism control orders with Arts 5 and 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 was the subject of litigation culminating in three House of Lords' judgments in late 2007, and a further case on Art 6 will be argued before a nine-panel House of Lords in March 2009. To date, the litigation has required important modifications to be made to how control orders work, but the regime provided by the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 remains essentially intact. The government therefore claims that control orders strike an appropriate balance between the interests of liberty and security. This paper critiques the role played by the courts in challenging control orders under human rights laws. It argues that it is necessary to incorporate the right to freedom of movement into UK law in order to allow a proper balance between liberty and security to be effected by the courts

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: March 2009
Organisations: Law

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 142049
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/142049
ISSN: 0261-3875
PURE UUID: 8b61cfc2-a961-4f48-830b-8e32fc9dfb1a

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 30 Mar 2010 13:45
Last modified: 17 Jul 2019 00:09

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×