Blair Wins Passage of Security Law with easier standard of "suspicion. "

[papau]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-britain12mar12.story

THE WORLD
Blair Wins Passage of Security Law
After 30 hours of debate, the House of Lords approves a bill that will allow terrorism suspects to be kept under tight police control.
By John Daniszewski
Times Staff Writer

March 12, 2005

LONDON — After a bitter parliamentary struggle, Prime Minister Tony Blair pushed through a new anti-terrorism law Friday that allows suspects to be kept under tight police control on a judge's order.

The House of Lords approved the measure without amendment Friday night after more than 30 hours of deliberations. The breakthrough came when Blair's Labor Party government agreed that lawmakers would have the opportunity to reject or rewrite the law next year.
<snip>

Blair argued that the new anti-terrorism bill was vital to help protect the British public from attacks such as the train bombings in Madrid, which occurred a year ago Friday. The old law, under which the eight suspects were detained without trial for as long as three years, was ruled illegal by Britain's highest court in December. It remains in force, but is due to expire Sunday night.
<snip>

Conservative and Liberal Democratic opponents in the House of Lords said the bill was sloppy and ill-conceived. They argued that provisions allowing house detention based simply on suspicion would threaten the fundamental liberties that have taken root in Britain over eight centuries. <snip>

The expectation that Blair will call a general election to take place May 5 contributed to intransigence on both sides. The Conservatives hoped that their defense of civil liberties, such as the right of a defendant to face his accusers and protection against detention on a government official's say-so, would strike a chord with voters.<snip>


The new law allows controls to be placed on terrorism suspects whether they are foreign or British, up to and including house arrest. Suspects who violate their control orders could then be jailed.

Blair initially suggested that the Home Office alone could decide on the controls, but in response to objections raised by the House of Lords, he agreed that a judge would have to authorize the control orders.<snip>