220:
ground that a power of detention confined to foreigners is irrational and discriminatory. I would prefer not to express a view on this point. I said that the power of detention is at present confined to foreigners and I would not like to give the impression that all that was necessary was to extend the power to United
Kingdom citizens as well. In my opinion, such a power in any form is not compatible with our constitution. 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. That is the true measure of what terrorism may achieve. It is for Parliament to decide whether to give the terrorists such a victory.
31:
219:
For these reasons I think that the
Special Immigration Appeals Commission made an error of law and that the appeal ought to be allowed. Others of your Lordships who are also in favour of allowing the appeal would do so, not because there is no emergency threatening the life of the nation, but on the
200:
dissented in strong terms, but agreed that the appeals should be allowed. Whereas the majority argued that the 2001 Act was contrary to the ECHR because it discriminated between nationals and foreign nationals (Art.14 ECHR), Lord
Hoffmann stated that the whole scheme was incompatible with the United
190:
The more purely political (in a broad or narrow sense) a question is, the more appropriate it will be for political resolution and the less likely it is to be an appropriate matter for judicial decision. The smaller, therefore, will be the potential role of the court. It is the function of political
140:
Of the nine appellants, all except two were detained in
December 2001; the others were detained in February and April 2002 respectively. All were detained under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Part 4 of the Act provided for their indefinite detention without trial and deportation.
229:
also dissented, but would have dismissed the appeal. In his opinion, the discrimination was justified due to "sound, rational grounds for different treatment". While the indefinite detention provisions were a "grave concern", they were "necessary" and accompanied by "several important safeguards
216:. The Spanish people have not said that what happened in Madrid, hideous crime as it was, threatened the life of their nation. Their legendary pride would not allow it. Terrorist violence, serious as it is, does not threaten our institutions of government or our existence as a civil community.
201:
Kingdom's constitution, and its commitment to human rights. He dismissed the government's argument that under the ECHR and HRA it was possible to derogate from the ECHR's general provisions. His view was that the test – that there was a "threat to the life of the nation" – was not fulfilled.
207:
This is a nation which has been tested in adversity, which has survived physical destruction and catastrophic loss of life. I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive
177:) that, whilst their detention was lawful under the ATCSA 2001, section 23 was incompatible with the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. As a consequence, the House of Lords made a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 of the
299:"House of Lords - A (FC) and others (FC) (Appellants) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) (2004)A and others (Appellants) (FC) and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) (Conjoined Appeals)"
141:
However, the power was only applied to non-British nationals. Under section 25 of this Act, they had the right to appeal to the
Special Immigration Appeals Commission against their detention.
366:
371:
184:
Lord
Bingham said in relation to the application of Art.15 ECHR and whether there was a public emergency threatening the life of the nation:
105:
97:
351:
166:
134:
361:
254:
230:
against oppression". He therefore held that Part 4 of the 2001 Act was "proportionate, rational and non-discriminatory".
158:
113:
50:
A and others v
Secretary of State for the Home Department; X and another v Secretary of State for the Home Department
331:
239:
356:
250:
109:
298:
346:
137:
to eject them from the country on the basis that there was evidence that they threatened national security.
226:
154:
170:
121:
150:
321:, on whether persons can be detained indefinitely without reasons being given for that detention.
178:
162:
101:
69:
8:
125:
UKHL 71, which relates to the use of evidence obtained by torture in
British courts.
83:
318:
314:
93:
276:
340:
243:
197:
174:
30:
277:"A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Antiterrorism"
213:
212:
hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive
100:. It held that the indefinite detention of foreign prisoners in
209:
133:
The case began with nine men who challenged a decision of the
242:. This allows anyone of any nationality to be subjected to a
238:
Parliament decided to replace Part 4 of ATCSA 2001 with the
80:
A and others v
Secretary of State for the Home Department
191:
and not judicial bodies to resolve political questions.
367:
Article 14 of the
European Convention on Human Rights
122:
A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2)
338:
271:
269:
315:A v Secretary of State for the Home Department
253:. That case was also decided in favour of the
119:The case should not be confused with the case
266:
106:Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
29:
249:This case was eventually appealed to the
149:The House of Lords held by a majority (
372:United Kingdom constitutional case law
339:
296:
135:Special Immigration Appeals Commission
104:without trial under section 23 of the
114:European Convention on Human Rights
13:
14:
383:
325:
240:Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
352:2004 in United Kingdom case law
233:
290:
251:European Court of Human Rights
1:
227:Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
7:
181:, and allowed the appeals.
155:Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead
144:
10:
388:
362:Imprisonment and detention
303:publications.parliament.uk
24:A v SS for Home Department
171:Baroness Hale of Richmond
167:Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
68:
63:
55:
45:
37:
28:
23:
260:
205:
188:
151:Lord Bingham of Cornhill
128:
297:Department, Law Lords.
357:Home Office litigation
319:[2004] UKHL 56
224:
195:
159:Lord Hope of Craighead
96:case heard before the
332:full text of decision
203:
186:
179:Human Rights Act 1998
163:Lord Scott of Foscote
347:House of Lords cases
70:Indefinite detention
16:UK human rights case
86:(also known as the
76:
75:
379:
307:
306:
294:
288:
287:
285:
283:
273:
72:, right to trial
33:
21:
20:
387:
386:
382:
381:
380:
378:
377:
376:
337:
336:
328:
310:
295:
291:
281:
279:
275:
274:
267:
263:
236:
223:
194:
147:
131:
94:UK human rights
17:
12:
11:
5:
385:
375:
374:
369:
364:
359:
354:
349:
335:
334:
327:
326:External links
324:
323:
322:
309:
308:
289:
264:
262:
259:
235:
232:
222:
221:
217:
204:
193:
192:
187:
146:
143:
130:
127:
98:House of Lords
74:
73:
66:
65:
61:
60:
57:
53:
52:
47:
46:Full case name
43:
42:
41:House of Lords
39:
35:
34:
26:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
384:
373:
370:
368:
365:
363:
360:
358:
355:
353:
350:
348:
345:
344:
342:
333:
330:
329:
320:
317:
316:
312:
311:
304:
300:
293:
278:
272:
270:
265:
258:
256:
252:
247:
245:
244:control order
241:
231:
228:
218:
215:
211:
206:
202:
199:
198:Lord Hoffmann
189:
185:
182:
180:
176:
175:Lord Carswell
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
142:
138:
136:
126:
124:
123:
117:
115:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
91:
90:
85:
82:
81:
71:
67:
62:
58:
54:
51:
48:
44:
40:
36:
32:
27:
22:
19:
313:
302:
292:
280:. Retrieved
248:
237:
234:Significance
225:
196:
183:
148:
139:
132:
120:
118:
110:incompatible
88:
87:
79:
78:
77:
49:
18:
92:case) is a
341:Categories
282:22 January
255:applicants
89:Belmarsh 9
112:with the
214:Al-Qaeda
145:Judgment
102:Belmarsh
64:Keywords
56:Citation
84:UKHL 56
59:UKHL 56
210:Hitler
261:Notes
129:Facts
38:Court
284:2020
173:and
108:was
343::
301:.
268:^
257:.
246:.
169:,
165:,
161:,
157:,
153:,
116:.
305:.
286:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
