A
Ardross
Guest
Terror detainees win Lords appeal
Most of the men are being held at Belmarsh Prison
Detaining foreign terrorist suspects without trial breaks human rights laws, the UK's highest court has ruled
In a blow to the government's anti-terror measures, the House of Lords law lords ruled by an eight to one majority in favour of appeals by nine detainees.
The law lords said the measures were incompatible with European human rights laws. The men will stay behind bars while ministers decide how to react.
Solicitor Gareth Peirce called on the government to release them quickly.
Most of the men are being indefinitely held in Belmarsh prison, south London.
The ruling creates a major problem for Charles Clarke on his first day as home secretary following David Blunkett's resignation.
Indefinite imprisonment without charge or trial is anathema in any country which observes the rule of law
Lord Nicholls
Profiles: What we know about the detainees
The Liberal Democrats say Mr Clarke should use the fact he is new to the job to take issue with a law established by his predecessor, David Blunkett.
Belmarsh prison has been dubbed Britain's Guantanamo Bay by civil rights campaigners opposed to the use of emergency anti-terror laws.
The detainees took their case to the House of Lords after the Court of Appeal backed the Home Office's powers to hold them without limit or charge.
The government opted out of part of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to a fair trial in order to bring in anti-terrorism legislation in response to the 11 September attacks in the US.
Law Lords ruling in full (382kb)
Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Download and install the reader here
Any foreign national suspected of links with terrorism can be detained or can opt to be deported.
However those detained cannot be deported if this would mean persecution in their homeland.
On Thursday, senior law lord Lord Bingham said the rules were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights as they allowed detentions "in a way that discriminates on the ground of nationality or immigration status".
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, in his ruling, said: "Indefinite imprisonment without charge or trial is anathema in any country which observes the rule of law.
"It deprives the detained person of the protection a criminal trial is intended to afford."
Belmarsh - Britain's Guantanamo Bay?
He said the weakness for the government's case was that it was trying to justify detention without trial for foreign suspects - but not for British suspects.
Lord Hoffmann said: "The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these."
But Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, the one law lord to oppose the appeal, said the anti-terror laws contained important safeguards against oppression.
'Constitutional importance'
In a statement, detainee 'A' in Woodhill Prison said: "I hope now that the government will act upon this decision, scrap this illegal 'law' and release me and the other internees to return to our families and loved ones."
The case was heard by a panel of nine law lords rather than the usual five because of the constitutional importance of the case.
It will provoke an enormous constitutional crisis if the government fail to act swiftly
Solicitor Gareth Peirce
Ms Peirce, who represents eight of the detainees, said if the government now failed to act quickly, it "will provoke an enormous constitutional crisis if the government fail to act swiftly".
"The government has to take steps to withdraw the legislation and release the detainees."
If there was no swift government action the detainees could ask the European Court of Human Rights to get involved, she added.
She claimed the detention had driven four of the detainees to "madness", saying two were being held in Broadmoor hospital.
When the men were first held, they took their cases to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
The commission ruled on 30 July, 2002 that the anti-terror act unjustifiably discriminated against foreign nationals as British people could not be held in the same way.
But that ruling was later overturned by the Court of Appeal who said there was a state of emergency threatening the life of the nation.
* This is a wonderful judgment - if he had survived Blunkett should have gone for this reason .
Most of the men are being held at Belmarsh Prison
Detaining foreign terrorist suspects without trial breaks human rights laws, the UK's highest court has ruled
In a blow to the government's anti-terror measures, the House of Lords law lords ruled by an eight to one majority in favour of appeals by nine detainees.
The law lords said the measures were incompatible with European human rights laws. The men will stay behind bars while ministers decide how to react.
Solicitor Gareth Peirce called on the government to release them quickly.
Most of the men are being indefinitely held in Belmarsh prison, south London.
The ruling creates a major problem for Charles Clarke on his first day as home secretary following David Blunkett's resignation.
Indefinite imprisonment without charge or trial is anathema in any country which observes the rule of law
Lord Nicholls
Profiles: What we know about the detainees
The Liberal Democrats say Mr Clarke should use the fact he is new to the job to take issue with a law established by his predecessor, David Blunkett.
Belmarsh prison has been dubbed Britain's Guantanamo Bay by civil rights campaigners opposed to the use of emergency anti-terror laws.
The detainees took their case to the House of Lords after the Court of Appeal backed the Home Office's powers to hold them without limit or charge.
The government opted out of part of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to a fair trial in order to bring in anti-terrorism legislation in response to the 11 September attacks in the US.
Law Lords ruling in full (382kb)
Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Download and install the reader here
Any foreign national suspected of links with terrorism can be detained or can opt to be deported.
However those detained cannot be deported if this would mean persecution in their homeland.
On Thursday, senior law lord Lord Bingham said the rules were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights as they allowed detentions "in a way that discriminates on the ground of nationality or immigration status".
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, in his ruling, said: "Indefinite imprisonment without charge or trial is anathema in any country which observes the rule of law.
"It deprives the detained person of the protection a criminal trial is intended to afford."
Belmarsh - Britain's Guantanamo Bay?
He said the weakness for the government's case was that it was trying to justify detention without trial for foreign suspects - but not for British suspects.
Lord Hoffmann said: "The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these."
But Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, the one law lord to oppose the appeal, said the anti-terror laws contained important safeguards against oppression.
'Constitutional importance'
In a statement, detainee 'A' in Woodhill Prison said: "I hope now that the government will act upon this decision, scrap this illegal 'law' and release me and the other internees to return to our families and loved ones."
The case was heard by a panel of nine law lords rather than the usual five because of the constitutional importance of the case.
It will provoke an enormous constitutional crisis if the government fail to act swiftly
Solicitor Gareth Peirce
Ms Peirce, who represents eight of the detainees, said if the government now failed to act quickly, it "will provoke an enormous constitutional crisis if the government fail to act swiftly".
"The government has to take steps to withdraw the legislation and release the detainees."
If there was no swift government action the detainees could ask the European Court of Human Rights to get involved, she added.
She claimed the detention had driven four of the detainees to "madness", saying two were being held in Broadmoor hospital.
When the men were first held, they took their cases to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
The commission ruled on 30 July, 2002 that the anti-terror act unjustifiably discriminated against foreign nationals as British people could not be held in the same way.
But that ruling was later overturned by the Court of Appeal who said there was a state of emergency threatening the life of the nation.
* This is a wonderful judgment - if he had survived Blunkett should have gone for this reason .