Judge says UK terrorism law contradicts human rights legislation

The Court of Appeals of England and Wales ruled on Tuesday that the U.K.'s Terrorism Act 2000 was incompatible with European human rights legislation. A judge said in a court of appeal judgement that the country's terrorism law lacks safeguards for journalists's right to free expression.

The decision came in the case of David Miranda, partner of Glenn Greenwald, the lead journalist in publicizing Edward Snowden's surveillance revelations. Miranda was detained at Heathrow airport in August 2013 for carrying files related to information obtained by Snowden.

Miranda was detained for nine hours of questioning at the airport.  David Miranda was carrying encrypted information from the Snowden stash that he had picked up in Berlin and was taking back to Greenwald in Brazil, Fortune reported.

The police detained Miranda under the Terrorism Act 2000, on the basis that the material he was carying was "designed to influence a government, and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause [and] therefore falls within the definition of terrorism." The police took the documents that they claimed as highly classified U.K. intelligence documents.

Miranda filed a judicial review against the authorities but lost his case. The court said the publication of the sort of material he was carrying could indeed amount to terrorism.

John Dyson, the most senior civil judge in England and Wales, made the Tuesday ruling with Lord Justice Richards and Lord Justice Floyd, the Guardian reported. Dyson said the powers contained in schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 were flawed.

The U.K. terrorism act allows travellers to be questioned to find out whether they appear to be terrorists. The travellers have no right to remain silent or receive legal advice and they may be detained for up to six hours. That makes the Terrorism Act 2000 is incompatible with Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which cover free expression.

In Tuesday ruling, Dyson said, "If journalists and their sources can have no expectation of confidentiality, they may decide against providing information on sensitive matters of public interest. That is why the confidentiality of such information is so important."

Human rights group Liberty, which brought Miranda case before the court, said the ruling is a major victory for the free press, Huffington Post reported.

Legal officer for Liberty, Rosie Brighouse, said the ruling is a reminder of how crucial the Human Rights Act for protecting journalists' rights.

The court of appeal's judgement will force British government to review the terrorism act. The ruling will force the Parliament to decide how to change the law so that it is compatible with the European Conventionon Human Rights that protects freedom of expression.

Tags

U.K., human rights, Terrorism Act 2000, Court of Appeals, David Miranda, Glenn Greenwald, Edward Snowden

© 2023 Lawyer Herald All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.