Small victory for human rights?

The Court of Appeal has thrown out a government challenge to a High Court order quashing control orders imposed on two alleged terror suspects.

In January, Lord Justice Silber sitting in the High Court said that orders imposed on two men, known as AE and AF, must be retrospectively quashed.

The decision effectively gave the go-ahead for damages claims for loss of liberty and alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights dating back to 2006, when the orders were first imposed.

The case hinged on the government's refusal to disclose secret evidence on which the allegations against the two men were apparently founded.

Then home secretary Alan Johnson conceded the orders should be revoked but the government appealed against the judge's decision that they should be quashed.

Lord Justice Maurice Kay, sitting with Lord Justice Rix and Lord Justice Stanley Burnton, dismissed the appeal on Wednesday and upheld the High Court ruling.

Lord Justice Kay said: "I agree with the submission made on behalf of the controlees that, if the appropriate remedy was merely revocation, there is a risk that the breach of convention rights would go substantially unremedied."

Solicitor for AE Mohammed Ayub told the Star: "This is a highly significant ruling and now sets the stage for the Secretary of State to carefully review the use of control orders where he does not wish disclosure.

"We have maintained throughout that the control order regime is flawed but the government persists and has set obstacles in the way at every stage. The message from the courts should be clear.

"My client and his family have been highly traumatised - being labelled a terrorist is a very harmful thing. I think it is now time for this chapter to be closed."

AE commented: "My life has been on hold since the imposition of the control order in May 2006 and will continue to be until these proceedings are concluded. I am very upset that I have been labelled a terrorist suspect without a shred of evidence ever having been disclosed against me by the Secretary of State.

"I have always maintained my innocence and deplore those who engage in terrorist activities. I feel the control order not only punished me for something I have never done but also my family was equally affected."

Amnesty International UK Campaigns Director Tim Hancock said: "Victims of human rights violations must have a right to remedy and today's decision reaffirms that individuals whose fundamental human rights have been violated by the control order regime can seek compensation.

"Amnesty International has opposed control orders from their inception and we are urging the government to abolish them altogether in their counter-terrorism review."

The court refused the government permission to appeal to the Supreme Court but it confirmed last night that it has applied to the higher court directly.

A Home Office spokesman said: "We will resist strongly paying damages to former subjects of control orders wherever possible, and to minimise the level of compensation where we have no choice but to pay."


(2010-07-27/Morning Star Online)