Now there is a new axis of evil:
Guantanamo Bay
Abu Ghuraib
Belmarsh Prison.
Way to go. :k:
Law Lords review terror detention](BBC NEWS | UK | Law Lords review terror detention)
Protesters outside Belmarsh, where most of the detainees are held
Nine Law Lords have begun hearing a challenge to the government’s right to detain foreign terror suspects without trial.
The case focuses on nine suspects who have been held for up to three years.
The detainees’ legal team argue it is wrong for them to be held without charge indefinitely and wrong to single out foreign nationals.
The government believes the measure is justified because of the scale of the terrorist threat after 11 September.
The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act allows the imprisonment without trial of foreign nationals certified by the home secretary as a threat to national security, but who cannot be sent home because they might face death or torture.
Opening the hearing in the House of Lords, Ben Emmerson QC, who represents seven of the detainees, said the issue was “very straightforward”.
He said: "In a democracy it is unacceptable to lock up potentially innocent people without trial or without any indication when, if ever, they are going to be released.
“We say it is doubly unacceptable for a democracy committed to the principles of equality and anti-discrimination to single out foreign nationals when it is not prepared to apply the same measures to its own nationals.”
The government opted out of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the right to liberty and security of person, in order to introduce the new anti-terrorism laws.
A legal challenge was mounted but in August, three Court of Appeal judges decided by a two-to-one majority that the government was legally entitled to hold the men.
The nine detainees are challenging that decision.
Eight of the appellants are currently in custody. The ninth, an Algerian man known as “D”, was released in September.
‘Compelling evidence’
Attorney General Lord Goldsmith QC is leading a team of lawyers who will vigorously defend the government’s stance.
He will argue that the 2001 attacks were an “unprecedented form of terrorism” - a new phase in an "ideological war by Islamist extremists - which demanded a robust response from the government.
“No responsible government could have failed to give careful consideration to an appropriate response to this new and intense threat to the nation.”
He will say that the measures taken were “well within” the scope of what was open to Parliament.
In an earlier statement the Home Office said that the measures were a “necessary and proportionate response to the threat we continue to face”.
“The home secretary has used these powers sparingly and on the basis of detailed and compelling evidence,” it added.
The detainees cannot be put on trial because evidence is too secret or would be inadmissible in a criminal court, the government claims.
Shami Chakrabarti, director of campaign group Liberty, says the case of the detainees, many of whom are detained in Belmarsh maximum security prison in London, is “possibly the most important constitutional law case for a lifetime”.
She told the BBC: "In a democracy it is much easier to give up the fundamental human rights of aliens or foreigners.
“If we, British voters, thought it might be our family or our friends we would be a lot more nervous about letting the home secretary suspend the rule of law in this way.”
The hearing, which is scheduled to last four days, was adjourned until Tuesday.