Watchdog warns on anti-terror laws

Watchdog warns on anti-terror laws

David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terror legislation, has warned the definitions may be too broad

David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terror legislation, has warned the definitions may be too broad

First published in National News © by

Britain's anti-terror laws are in danger of catching journalists, bloggers and other people they were never intended to cover, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has warned.

David Anderson QC said the legal definition of terrorism was too widely drawn and called on Parliament to revisit the legislation.

"The problem is that our definition has begun to catch people that it was never really intended to catch," Mr Anderson told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

"I give credit to the prosecuting authorities and to the police and indeed to ministers because I don't think they very often abuse or stretch the very wide discretions they are given under the Act.

"The problem is more that people who should never get caught by these laws just get worried that they might be and that could have the effect of restricting the way that they go about their business."

Mr Anderson, who publishes his annual report today, warned that the public would only continue to accept the legislation - which gives the authorities extended powers of arrest and detention - if they were sure it was genuinely needed.

"You could look at the example of journalists and bloggers, for example, who can be considered terrorists, it seems, if they are seeking to influence the Government and if their words endanger life or create a serious risk to public health or safety. Foolish or dangerous journalism is one thing, terrorism is another," he said.

"I think the problem there is the way the bar is set. It is enough that you are trying to influence the Government for political reasons. In most other countries you need to have to intimidate the government or coerce the government before you can be a terrorist."

He referred to the case of David Miranda - the partner of journalist Glenn Greenwald who was involved in publicising the disclosures of former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden - who was detained at Heathrow Airport for several hours on suspicion that he was carrying stolen documents.

"I would certainly accept that the police ought to have the power in those circumstances to stop somebody and detain them and see what's going on. What I think is more difficult to defend is the use of anti-terrorism laws for that purpose," Mr Anderson said.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:16pm Tue 22 Jul 14

RM says...

Good for you Mr Anderson to make this point. Unfortunately, its all part of the govt's plan to snoop, pry & threaten so they can ensure there are no protests against any of their actions or decisions, however wrong they may be. Don't expect any change any time soon.
Good for you Mr Anderson to make this point. Unfortunately, its all part of the govt's plan to snoop, pry & threaten so they can ensure there are no protests against any of their actions or decisions, however wrong they may be. Don't expect any change any time soon. RM
  • Score: 1

2:23pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Thecynic says...

These powers have already been misused many, many times before. Remember the old Gentleman who was forcefully evicted from a party conference for simply shouting 'Rubish' after an MP made a remark? Detained under the terrorism law because the police couldn't find any other law to charge him with.
Other Countries manage without such draconian laws against their citizens, so I guess their Governments are better or cleverer than ours at dealing with such threats.
These powers have already been misused many, many times before. Remember the old Gentleman who was forcefully evicted from a party conference for simply shouting 'Rubish' after an MP made a remark? Detained under the terrorism law because the police couldn't find any other law to charge him with. Other Countries manage without such draconian laws against their citizens, so I guess their Governments are better or cleverer than ours at dealing with such threats. Thecynic
  • Score: 1
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree