28-day terror limit to be extended

BBC

The 28-day limit for police to hold terror suspects without charge will almost certainly need to be extended, an influential committee of MPs says.

But the Home Affairs Committee report warns any such move would require extra safeguards to be put in place.

It attacks the government’s failure to bring in a 90-day limit, a plan thrown out by Labour rebels in November.

Committee chairman John Denham said evidence leading to detention without charge needed to be “compelling”.

Justification

A Home Office spokesman said it would consider the committee’s recommendations.

He added the police and opposition parties had backed an extension to the current 14-day limit.

Ministers have made clear they felt there was still a need to go further than the 28-day compromise, which was agreed in November.

In its report, the committee says no recent cases provide justification for a longer detention period.

But it adds: “The growing number of cases and the increase in suspects monitored by the police and security services make it entirely possible, and perhaps increasingly likely, that there will be cases that do provide that justification.

“We therefore believe that the 28-day limit may well prove inadequate in the future.”

However, the MPs say there should be regular assessments to see if suspects could be released under supervision such as tagging or control orders and that all arrests should be subject to judicial supervision.

The report says such measures would have helped in cases such as the recent anti-terror raid in Forest Gate, east London.

It calls for a senior committee to be formed to keep the detention limit under review.

But it is highly critical of the roles played by the police and the government in the attempt to set a 90-day limit.

“On such a major issue, with very significant human rights implications, we would have expected the case made by the police to have been better developed.”

‘Lack of care’

The report adds that it was “unsatisfactory” that the prime minister and home secretary had not “critically challenged” the police’s advice to assure themselves of the case that was being made.

It says a “lack of care” in presenting the case, rather than the breakdown of political consensus blamed by then Home Secretary Charles Clarke, was the main reason for the difficulties.

John Denham, Labour chairman of the committee, said: “Earlier arrest, which means longer detention, is serving an important new function in disrupting and preventing terrorism.

“However, on an issue like this, the trust and confidence of the public and the Muslim community specifically is absolutely crucial; we cannot afford divisive arguments.”

But he added: “Any new legislation should not propose longer than 28 days detention unless the evidence is compelling.”

However, one member of the committee has rejected the report’s findings.

Labour MP David Winnick, who tabled the original 28-day compromise motion, warned that any extension could antagonise the Muslim community and there would have to be “really compelling evidence” for such a move.

The Home Office said the timetable for the Terrorism Act 2006, including the proposal to extend the maximum period of detention pre-charge, had been accelerated with opposition party backing after the 7 July attacks last year.

He added: “The strong advice we received from the police, most notably from the country’s most senior anti-terrorist police officer, was that terrorist investigations are now more complex and that the current maximum period of detention - 14 days - was no longer considered adequate.”

The police had said there was a need to hold a small number of terrorist suspects for up to a maximum of 90 days.