plm100305.469-473

House of Commons

Session 2004 - 05
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament

469

House of Commons

Thursday 10th March 2005

Proceedings on Lords Message

Prevention of Terrorism Bill

On Consideration of Lords Reasons for insisting on Amendments

Lords Amendment No. 1D

Mr Secretary Clarke

To move, That this House insists on its Amendments 1A and 1B to Lords Amendment 1, insists

on its disagreement to Lords Amendments 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37 and insists on its

Amendments 37A to 37C and 37E to 37O, does not insist on its Amendment 37D, insists on its

disagreement to Lords Amendments 37Q to 37T proposed in lieu of Lords Amendment 8 and insists

on its Amendments 17H to 17M to the words restored to the Bill by its insistence on its

disagreement to Lords Amendment 17 and proposes the following Amendment in lieu

(a)

Page  5,  line  12,  at end insert the following new Clause:—


‘Supervision by court of making of non-derogating control orders

(1)
The Secretary of State must not make a non-derogating control order against an

individual except where—

(a)
having decided that there are grounds to make such an order against that

individual, he has applied to the court for permission to make the order

and has been granted that permission;

(b)
the order contains a statement by the Secretary of State that, in his

opinion, the urgency of the case requires the order to be made without

such permission; or

(c)
the order is made before 14th March 2005 against an individual who, at

the time it is made, is an individual in respect of whom a certificate under

section 21(1) of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (c. 24)

is in force.

(2)
On an application for permission to make a non-derogating control order against

an individual—

(a)
the function of the court is to consider whether the Secretary of State’s

decision that there are grounds to make the order in question against that

individual is obviously flawed;

(b)
the court may give that permission unless it determines that that decision

is obviously flawed; and

Proceedings on Consideration of Lords Messages: 10th March 2005

470

Prevention of Terrorism Bill, continued

(c)
if it gives permission, the court must give directions for a hearing in

relation to the order as soon as reasonably practicable after it is made.

(3)
Where the Secretary of State makes a non-derogating control order against an

individual without the permission of the court—

(a)
he must immediately refer the order to the court; and

(b)
the function of the court on the reference is to consider whether the

decision of the Secretary of State to make the order he did was obviously

flawed.

(4)
The court’s consideration on a reference under subsection (3)(a) must begin no

more than 7 days after the day on which the control order in question was made.

(5)
The court may consider an application for permission under subsection (1)(a) or

a reference under subsection (3)(a)—

(a)
in the absence of the individual in question;

(b)
without his having been notified of the application or reference; and

(c)
without his having been given an opportunity (if he was aware of the

application or reference) of making any representations to the court;


but this subsection is not to be construed as limiting the matters about which rules

of court may be made in relation to the consideration of such an application or

reference.

(6)
On a reference under subsection (3)(a), the court—

(a)
if it determines that the decision of the Secretary of State to make a non-

derogating control order against the controlled person was obviously

flawed, must quash the order;

(b)
if it determines that that decision was not obviously flawed but that a

decision of the Secretary of State to impose a particular obligation by that

order was obviously flawed, must quash that obligation and (subject to

that) confirm the order and give directions for a hearing in relation to the

confirmed order; and

(c)
in any other case, must confirm the order and give directions for a hearing

in relation to the confirmed order.

(7)
The directions given under subsection (2)(c) or (6)(b) or (c) must include

arrangements for the individual in question to be given an opportunity within 7

days of the court’s giving permission or (as the case may be) making its

determination on the reference to make representations about—

(a)
the directions already given; and

(b)
the making of further directions.

(8)
On a reference under subsection (3)(a), the court may quash a certificate

contained in the order for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) if it determines that

the Secretary of State’s decision that the certificate should be contained in the

order was flawed.

(9)
The court must ensure that the controlled person is notified of its decision on a

reference under subsection (3)(a).

(10)
On a hearing in pursuance of directions under subsection (2)(c) or (6)(b) or (c),

the function of the court is to determine whether any of the following decisions

of the Secretary of State was flawed—

(a)
his decision that the requirements of section 3(A1)(a) and (b) were

satisfied for the making of the order; and

(b)
his decisions on the imposition of each of the obligations imposed by the

order.

(11)
In determining—

(a)
what constitutes a flawed decision for the purposes of subsection (2), (6)

or (7), or

Proceedings on Consideration of Lords Messages: 10th March 2005

471

Prevention of Terrorism Bill, continued

(b)
the matters mentioned in subsection (10),


the court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial

review.

(12)
If the court determines, on a hearing in pursuance of directions under subsection

(2)(c) or (6)(b) or (c), that a decision of the Secretary of State was flawed, its only

powers are—

(a)
power to quash the order;

(b)
power to quash one or more obligations imposed by the order; and

(c)
power to give directions to the Secretary of State for the revocation of the

order or for the modification of the obligations it imposes.

(13)
In every other case the court must decide that the control order is to continue in

force.

(14)
If requested to do so by the controlled person, the court must discontinue any

hearing in pursuance of directions under subsection (2)(c) or (6)(b) or (c).’.

Agreed to on division

Lords Amendments Nos. 27, 31 and 32

Mr Secretary Clarke

To move, That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments Nos.

27, 31 and 32 and on its Amendments 27C and 27D in lieu and proposes the following Amendments

in lieu

(a)

Page  13,  line  6,  at end insert—

‘( )
That report must also contain the opinion of the person making it on the

implications for the operation of this Act of any proposal made by the Secretary

of State for the amendment of the law relating to terrorism.’.

Agreed to on division

Lords Amendment No. 33D

Mr Secretary Clarke

To move, That this House disagrees with Lords Amendment 33D and insists on its Amendment

33C in lieu, does not insist on its Amendments 33A and 33B and proposes the following

Amendments in lieu

(a)

Page  12,  line  37,  at end insert the following new Clause—


‘Duration of ss. 1 to 6

(1)
Except so far as otherwise provided under this section, sections 1 to 6 expire at

the end of the period of 12 months beginning with the day on which this Act is

passed.

Proceedings on Consideration of Lords Messages: 10th March 2005

472

Prevention of Terrorism Bill, continued

(2)

(3)
The Secretary of State may, by order made by statutory instrument—

(a)
repeal sections 1 to 6;

(b)
at any time revive those sections for a period not exceeding one year; or

(c)
provide that those sections—

(i)
are not to expire at the time when they would otherwise expire

under subsection (1) or in accordance with an order under this

subsection; but

(ii)
are to continue in force after that time for a period not exceeding

one year.

(iii)

(4)
Before making an order under this section the Secretary of State must consult the

person appointed for the purposes of section 11(2).

(5)

(6)
No order may be made by the Secretary of State under this section unless a draft

of it has been laid before Parliament and approved by a resolution of each House.

(7)

(8)
Subsection (4) does not apply to an order that contains a declaration by the

Secretary of State that the order needs, by reason of urgency, to be made without

the approval required by that subsection.

(9)
An order under this section that contains such a declaration—

(a)
must be laid before Parliament after being made; and

(b)
if not approved by a resolution of each House before the end of 40 days

beginning with the day on which the order was made, ceases to have

effect at the end of that period.

(c)

(10)
Where an order ceases to have effect in accordance with subsection (6), that does

not—

(a)
affect anything previously done in reliance on the order; or

(b)
prevent the making of a new order to the same or similar effect.

(c)

(11)
Where sections 1 to 6 expire or are repealed at any time by virtue of this section,

that does not prevent or otherwise affect—

(a)
the court’s consideration of a reference made before that time under

subsection (3)(a) of section (Supervision by court of making of non-

derogating control orders);

(b)
the holding or continuation after that time of any hearing in pursuance of

directions under subsection (2)(c) or (6)(b) or (c) of that section;

(c)
the holding or continuation after that time of a hearing to determine

whether to confirm a derogating control order (with or without

modifications); or

(d)
the bringing or continuation after that time of any appeal, or further

appeal, relating to a decision in any proceedings mentioned in paragraphs

(a) to (c) of this subsection;

Proceedings on Consideration of Lords Messages: 10th March 2005

473

Prevention of Terrorism Bill, continued


but proceedings may be begun or continued by virtue of this subsection so far

only as they are for the purpose of determining whether a certificate of the

Secretary of State a control order or an obligation imposed by such an order

should be quashed or treated as quashed.



(12)
Nothing in this Act about the period for which a control order is to have effect or

is renewed enables such an order to continue in force after the provision under

which it was made or last renewed has expired or been repealed by virtue of this

section.

(13)

(14)
In subsection (6) “40 days” means 40 days computed as provided for in section

7(1) of the Statutory Instruments Act 1946 (c. 36).’.

(b)

Page  13,  line  1,  leave out ‘every relevant 12 month period’ and insert—

(a)
the period of 9 months beginning with the day on which this Act is

passed, and

(b)
every 12 month period which ends with the first or a subsequent

anniversary of the end of the period mentioned in the preceding

paragraph and is a period during the whole or a part of which sections 1

to 6 of this Act were in force.’.

Agreed to on division