Home secretary Alan Johnson said control orders remained 'viable' and the 'best available disruptive tool for managing the risk [terror suspects] pose'.
Courts have already ruled that suspects placed under the orders must be informed about secret evidence being used against them.
One suspect, a Libyan national identified only as AF, has had his order revoked because the government was unwilling to disclose the nature of the evidence at the risk of national security.
Introduced in 2005, control orders allow the government to indefinitely tag individuals linked to suspected terrorist activity; confine them to their homes and ban them from communicating with the outside world.
Mr Johnson today reaffirmed that the orders would only be used when the government could not prosecute, detain or deport terror suspects.
But in a written ministerial statement the home secretary is bound by law to deliver every three months on the status of control orders he accepted that in light of recent judgments the entire system should be reviewed.
Mr Johnson has asked Lord Carlile to review the impact of the judgment to advise on whether the government view that the regime remains viable is right.
He is due to publish his findings in his next annual report in his role as the independent reviewer of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.
Human rights group Liberty said it was saddened by Mr Johnson's unwillingness to correct what is termed the 'tragic mistakes' of his predecessors.
Shami Chakrabarti, the group's director, said: 'The recent liquid bomb trials demonstrate how successfully British police and prosecutors can deal with terrorism within the rule of law.
'Instead of asking Home Office reviewers to be considering how many control orders they can get away with, Mr Johnson should be passing case files to independent prosecutors with a view to charging the guilty and freeing the innocent.'
In his statement today Mr Johnson revealed that five control orders had been renewed in the last three months, meaning 15 remain in force, seven of them in London.
No comments:
Post a Comment