What is RSS?

Working with the media

MPs briefed on Church of England’s position on 42 day detention

5 June 2008

MPs have been briefed on the position taken by the Church of England in advance of debate in the House of Commons on proposals to extend detention without charge to 42 days within the Counter Terrorism Bill.

The various “concessions” or adjustments to the proposal offered by the Government in recent weeks have not addressed the central concerns expressed by the General Synod when it debated the subject, in February, the briefing notes:

“We believe that a convincing case for the extension of the maximum period of detention without charge beyond 28 days has not been made out. This central point has not been addressed in the various “concessions” or adjustments to the proposal offered by the Government in recent weeks. We believe that any extension beyond 28 days will unacceptably disturb the balance between the liberty of the individual and the needs of national security.”

 

 

The full text of the briefing to MPs is included below.

 

To Members of the House of Commons

 

Counter Terrorism Bill

The Church of England’s Position on 42 Day Detention

 

The Commons is expecting to debate the Counter Terrorism Bill, including the Government’s proposals for extending the period of detention without charge to 42 days, within the next few days.  I wanted to take this opportunity to remind you that the Church of England General Synod debated this issue in February 2008, and to brief you on the Church’s position regarding this proposal.

The Church of England is acutely aware of the responsibilities facing Government in balancing the requirements of justice and security, especially in countering new threats directed not only at our persons and property but at our national way of life.  It is precisely because the principle of liberty is so central to our culture and common life that the Church wished to explore the issues involved and come to a mind on them.

The motion passed by the Synod is set out overleaf. The debate was supported by a report from the Mission and Public Affairs Council entitled Detention Without Charge.

We believe that a convincing case for the extension of the maximum period of detention without charge beyond 28 days has not been made out. This central point has not been addressed in the various “concessions” or adjustments to the proposal offered by the Government in recent weeks. We believe that any extension beyond 28 days will unacceptably disturb the balance between the liberty of the individual and the needs of national security.

The Mission and Public Affairs Division of the Church of England produces briefings that set out the position of the Church of England on key parliamentary and public policy issues. As part of our ongoing engagement with parliamentarians, we produce a regular e-bulletin for MPs as well as single-issue briefings like this letter. To receive these, you can either email your details to parliamentary@c-of-e.org.uk or send them by letter or fax to the address or number below.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Malcolm Brown (Rev Dr)

Director

Mission and Public Affairs Division

Archbishops’ Council

 

 

 

In February 2008, the General Synod passed the following motion:

 

That this Synod, mindful both of the Christian teaching that enforcement of law should be just in process and outcome, and of the challenge that the advent of suicide attacks poses for the general public and for those who bear responsibility for protecting the public from terrorism:

(a) emphasise the importance of society maintaining a careful balance between the liberty of the individual and the needs of national security,

(b) express grave concern that an extension to the current 28-day maximum period for detention without charge of terrorist suspects would, in the absence of the most compelling arguments, disturb that balance unacceptably,

(c) while welcoming the release of most UK prisoners from Guantanamo Bay, deplore the continued holding of prisoners there without charge or due process and encourage Her Majesty’s Government to continue to use all available means to press the United States administration to close the Guantanamo Bay facility and restore the full application of the rule of law, and

(d) affirm the desirability of an early review by the Government of the restrictions and other obligations that may be imposed on individuals under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and the use of undisclosed material in control order proceedings.

The motion was passed by the Synod by 235 votes to 2, with 7 abstentions.

The report, Detention Without Charge, reminded the Synod of the Christian teaching about the dignity and equality of human beings which underlies the principles of liberal democracy. Similarly the modern concept of human rights builds on the Christian idea of natural rights conferred on all human beings by virtue of being created by God. The report also reflected upon the corruption of human nature which requires us to mitigate the effects of human wickedness but also to avoid placing excessive power in the hands of rulers and human authorities. The report noted that “no response to the threat of terrorism can simply give priority to liberty over security, or vice versa”.

Since 2000, the maximum period of detention without charge has been quadrupled.  In October 2007 the Mission and Public Affairs Council submitted a response to the consultation on the Counter Terrorism Bill which argued that a convincing case for the increase in the maximum period beyond 28 days had not yet been made out. This was also the conclusion of reports published by the cross-party Commons Home Affairs Committee in July 2006 and December 2007, and by the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights in July 2007, February and May 2008. Many others have since concurred with this position, including the previous Attorney General, the current Director of Public Prosecutions and the Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commissioner. It remains the position of the Church of England.

We note that the Government has moved a long way to meet its critics since its proposal in 2005 of a 90-day maximum period and its suggestion last year of 56 days.  The Church’s concerns are alleviated to some extent by the current proposal to treat the extension to 42 days as an emergency provision triggered by perceived operational needs and limited in duration, now to 30 days rather than 60 as originally proposed.  However, we are sceptical about the viability of parliamentary scrutiny of decisions, and more fundamentally, remain unconvinced that the need for the change has been demonstrated.  We would draw attention to the way in which, over time, the exceptional can come to be treated as normal.  We urge that alternative methods of dealing with the complexity of terrorist investigations, such as post-charge questioning and the use of intercept evidence in court, should be seriously pursued.  In 2005, the General Synod called on all political parties “to heed the clear warnings of history about the progressive erosion of fundamental rights in relation to habeas corpus, free speech and religious liberty”. We make that call again in the light of the current debate.

feedback | contact us | links | site map | copyright & disclaimer | privacy | site help
Supported by Ecclesiastical Insurance Group
Site developed by ILRT