I, too, support the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, on Amendment 1, and his proposal that the imposition of a TPIM should be a judicial and not an administrative act. If restrictions of this nature on basic liberty are to be imposed, they are to be imposed on British citizens, and imposed entirely outside the criminal law process. Surely it is necessary for the procedure to require that they be imposed by judges, particularly when they are being imposed by reason of serious allegations of wrongdoing on the part of the individuals concerned?
The Minister said at Second Reading—and I reminded your Lordships in Committee—that the Government’s approach to this Bill was to try to balance civil liberties and security by ensuring that the Bill goes, "““no further than is absolutely necessary””—[Official Report, 5/10/11; col. 1137.]"
in limiting people’s rights. Those were his words. Surely that test, that criterion—which must be the right criterion—requires that these restrictions be imposed only with judicial approval. If the security services, with all the information available to them, are unable to persuade a High Court judge in a closed session, where the material is not disclosed to the individual concerned, that the restrictions are needed, the restrictions should not be imposed at all.
If the Revenue requires a court order before it is able to raid a person’s house in order to seize his documents, surely the Home Secretary should require a court order before she can require that same individual to remain in his house overnight, or not to contact other specified persons, or before she can impose any of the other specific restrictions under a TPIM order.
Your Lordships should have no doubt that for these orders to be imposed by a judge on application by the Home Secretary, and not to be imposed administratively by the Home Secretary herself, would substantially increase confidence in these orders in those sections of the community most suspicious of them.
Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Pannick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 15 November 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
732 c588-9 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:02:27 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_785270
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_785270
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_785270