UK Parliament / Open data

Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill

I am very grateful to the Minister. I would like to discuss this further with my colleagues on the Joint Committee on Human Rights and our legal adviser because as I listened to the Minister and reread the clause I asked myself what is the difference between a test of what is necessary and what is reasonably necessary. It occurs to me—and I hope my colleagues on the committee will forgive me for having this thought—that if the word ““necessary”” is in the clause and there was a challenge in the court, the court would be bound to apply the standard of reasonable necessity anyway because if the power were used unnecessarily it would be an unreasonable and disproportionate exercise of the power. Therefore, if that is a correct legal interpretation, the word ““reasonable”” would not be necessary. I mention this because the right to liberty is a basic civil right and one would not wish to give even Her Majesty’s forces carte blanche to hold someone indefinitely in order to compel him to provide information that he would be under a legal obligation to provide. I would like to reflect further on this. I doubt whether the Minister is willing to concede today that the word ““necessary”” necessarily imports the notion of reasonableness, but he may be able to reflect on that before we come back to this. It would be an importance acceptance in the course of the discussions on the Bill. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 20 agreed to. Clause 21 [Arrest]:
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c219-20GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top