05041.1-7

House of Lords

Session 2004 - 05
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament

Prevention of Terrorism Bill

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
COMMONS amendments AND REASONS
[The page and line references are to HL Bill 34, the bill as first printed for the Lords.]
Clause 1
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 1
1
Page 1, line 3, leave out from beginning to end of line 16 and insert—

“(1A)
In this Act “control order” means an order against an individual that

imposes obligations on him for purposes connected with protecting

members of the public from a risk of terrorism.

(1B)
The power to make a control order against an individual shall be

exercisable by the court on an application by the Secretary of State.

(1C)
The obligations that may be imposed by a control order made against an

individual are any obligations that the court considers necessary for

purposes connected with preventing or restricting involvement by that

individual in terrorism-related activity.

(1D)
Those obligations are—”

COMMONS AGREEMENT WITH AMENDMENTS

The Commons agree to this Amendment with the following Amendments—
1A
Line 6, after “exercisable” insert “—

(a)
except in the case of an order imposing obligations that are

incompatible with the individual’s right to liberty under Article 5

of the Human Rights Convention, by the Secretary of State; and

(b)
in the case of an order imposing obligations that are or include

derogating obligations,”
1B
Line 8, after “that” insert “the Secretary of State or (as the case may be)”
1C
Line 11, leave out “are” and insert “may include, in particular”

HL Bill 41 53/4

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
2

After Clause 1
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 6
6
Insert the following new Clause—

“Control orders: supplementary

(1)
If, as a consequence of the obligations imposed by a control order, a person

becomes unemployed, arrangements shall be made for that person to

receive any social security benefits or unemployment benefits to which he

may be entitled.

(2)
If a control order is made in respect of a person already in receipt of social

security benefits or unemployment benefits, arrangements shall be made to

ensure that the person shall continue to receive those benefits.

(3)
In any case where a control order is made, appropriate arrangements shall

be made to ensure that the person in respect of whom the order is made,

and his household, shall have access to, or shall continue to have access to,

supplies of food, household and personal necessities.

(4)
In any case where a control order is made, appropriate arrangements shall

be made to ensure that the person in respect of whom the order is made

shall have access to such health care as may be necessary.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

The Commons disagree to this Amendment for the following Reason—
6A
Because the Lords Amendment is unnecessary.
Clause 3
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 8
8
Leave out Clause 3 and insert the following new Clause—


“Making of control orders

(1)
The court may make a control order against an individual if it—

(a)
is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the individual is or

has been involved in terrorism-related activity;

(b)
considers that it is necessary, for purposes connected with

protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism, to make

a control order imposing obligations on that individual; and

(c)
has been informed by the Director of Public Prosecutions that there

is no reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution of the

individual for the terrorism-related activity.

(2)
On an application to the court by the Secretary of State for the making of a

control order against an individual, it shall be the duty of the court—

(a)
to hold an immediate preliminary hearing to determine whether to

make a control order against that individual; and

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
3

(b)
if it does make such an order against that individual, to give

directions for the holding of a full hearing to determine whether to

confirm the order (with or without modifications).

(3)
The preliminary hearing under subsection (1)(a) may be held—

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

(b)
without his having had notice of the application for the order; and

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

the application) 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 that hearing.

(4)
At the preliminary hearing, the court may make a control order against the

individual in question if it appears to the court—

(a)
that there is material which (if not disproved) is capable of being

relied on by the court as establishing that the individual is or has

been involved in terrorism-related activity;

(b)
that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the imposition

of obligations on that individual is necessary for purposes

connected with protecting members of the public from a risk of

terrorism; and

(c)
that if the obligations that there are reasonable grounds for

believing should be imposed on the individual are or include

derogating obligations of a description set out for the purposes of

the designated derogation in the designation order, the risk arises

out of, or is associated with, a public emergency in respect of which

there is a designated derogation from the whole or a part of Article

5 of the Human Rights Convention.

(5)
The obligations that may be imposed by a control order in the period

between—

(a)
the time when the order is made, and

(b)
the time when a final determination is made by the court whether

to confirm it,


include any obligations which the court has reasonable grounds for

considering are necessary as mentioned in section 1(3).

(6)
At the full hearing under subsection (1)(b), the court may—

(a)
confirm the control order made by the court; or

(b)
revoke the order;


and where the court revokes the order, it may (if it thinks fit) direct that this

Act is to have effect as if the order had been quashed.

(7)
In confirming a control order, the court—

(a)
may modify the obligations imposed by the order; and

(b)
where a modification made by the court removes an obligation,

may (if it thinks fit) direct that this Act is to have effect as if the

removed obligation had been quashed.

(8)
At the full hearing, the court may confirm the control order (with or

without modifications) only if—

(a)
it is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the controlled

person is an individual who is or has been involved in terrorism-

related activity;

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
4

(b)
it considers that the imposition of obligations on the controlled

person is necessary for purposes connected with protecting

members of the public from a risk of terrorism; and

(c)
if the obligations to be imposed by the order or (as the case may be)

by the order as modified are or include derogating obligations of a

description set out for the purposes of the designated derogation in

the designation order, it appears to the court that the risk is one

arising out of, or is associated with, a public emergency in respect

of which there is a designated derogation from the whole or a part

of Article 5 of the Human Rights Convention.

(9)
It shall be immaterial, for the purposes of determining what obligations

may be imposed by a control order made by the court, whether the

involvement in terrorism-related activity to be prevented or restricted by

the obligations is connected with matters in relation to which the

requirements of subsection (4)(a) or (8)(a) were satisfied.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37, but

propose Amendments 37A to 37O in lieu.
After Clause 3
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 9
9
Insert the following new Clause—

“Duration and renewal of control orders

(1)
A non-derogating control order—

(a)
has effect for a period of 12 months beginning with the day on

which it is made; but

(b)
may be renewed on one or more occasions in accordance with this

section.

(2)
A non-derogating control order must specify when the period for which it

is to have effect will end.

(3)
The court may renew a non-derogating control order (with or without

modifications) for a period of 12 months if it—

(a)
considers that it is necessary, for purposes connected with

protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism, for an

order imposing obligations on the controlled person to continue in

force; and

(b)
considers that the obligations to be imposed by the renewed order

are necessary for purposes connected with preventing or restricting

involvement by that person in terrorism-related activity.

(4)
Where the court renews a non-derogating control order, the 12 month

period of the renewal begins to run from whichever is the earlier of—

(a)
the time when the order would otherwise have ceased to have

effect; or

(b)
the beginning of the seventh day after the date of renewal.

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
5

(5)
The instrument renewing a non-derogating control order must specify

when the period for which it is renewed will end.

(6)
A derogating control order ceases to have effect at the end of the period of

6 months beginning with the day on which it is made unless—

(a)
it is previously revoked (whether at the hearing under subsection

(1)(b) or otherwise under this Act);

(b)
it ceases to have effect under section 5; or

(c)
it is renewed.

(7)
The court, on an application by the Secretary of State, may renew a

derogating control order (with or without modifications) for a period of 6

months from whichever is the earlier of—

(a)
the time when the order would otherwise have ceased to have

effect; and

(b)
the beginning of the seventh day after the date of renewal.

(8)
The power of the court to renew a derogating control order is exercisable

on as many occasions as the court thinks fit; but, on each occasion, it is

exercisable only if—

(a)
the court considers that it is necessary, for purposes connected with

protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism, for a

derogating control order to continue in force against the controlled

person;

(b)
it appears to the court that the risk is one arising out of, or is

associated with, a public emergency in respect of which there is a

designated derogation from the whole or a part of Article 5 of the

Human Rights Convention;

(c)
the derogating obligations that the court considers should continue

in force are of a description that continues to be set out for the

purposes of the designated derogation in the designation order;

and

(d)
the court considers that the obligations to be imposed by the

renewed order are necessary for purposes connected with

preventing or restricting involvement by that person in terrorism-

related activity.”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37, but

propose Amendments 37A to 37O in lieu.
Clause 5
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 12
12
Page 6, line 14, leave out subsections (1) to (3)

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37, but

propose Amendments 37A to 37O in lieu.

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
6

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 13
13
Page 7, line 7, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “court”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37, but

propose Amendments 37A to 37O in lieu.

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 15
15
Page 7, line 12, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “court”

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 22, 28 and 37, but

propose Amendments 37A to 37O in lieu.
After Clause 5
LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 16
16
Insert the following new Clause—

“Criminal investigations after making of control order

(1)
This section applies where a control order has been made against an

individual if it appears to the Secretary of State—

(a)
that the involvement in terrorism-related activity of which that

individual is suspected may have involved the commission of an

offence relating to terrorism; and

(b)
that the commission of that offence would fall to be investigated by

a police force.

(2)
The Secretary of State must inform the chief officer of the police force that

the control order has been made and that this section applies.

(3)
It shall then be the duty of the chief officer to secure that the investigation

of the individual’s conduct with a view to his prosecution for an offence

relating to terrorism is kept under review throughout the period during

which the control order has effect.

(4)
Where he considers it appropriate to do so in performing his duty under

subsection (3), the chief officer must consult the relevant prosecuting

authority.

(5)
In this section—

“chief officer”—

(a)
in relation to a police force maintained for a police area in

England and Wales, means the chief officer of police of that

force;

(b)
in relation to a police force maintained under the Police

(Scotland) Act 1967 (c. 77), means the chief constable of that

force;

Prevention of Terrorism Bill
7

(c)
in relation to the Police Service of Northern Ireland, means

the Chief Constable of that Service;

(d)
in relation to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, means

the Director General of that Agency; and

(e)
in relation to the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency, means

the Director of that Agency;

“police force” means—

(a)
a police force maintained for a police area in England and

Wales;

(b)
a police force maintained under the Police (Scotland) Act

1967 (c. 77);

(c)
the Police Service of Northern Ireland;

(d)
the Serious Organised Crime Agency; or

(e)
the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency;

“relevant prosecuting authority”—

(a)
in relation to offences that would be likely to be prosecuted

in England and Wales, means the Director of Public

Prosecutions;

(b)
in relation to offences that would be likely to be prosecuted

in Scotland, means the appropriate procurator fiscal;

(c)
in relation to offences that would be likely to be prosecuted

in Northern Ireland, means the Director of Public

Prosecutions for Northern Ireland.

(6)
In relation to times before the Serious Organised Crime Agency begins to

carry out its functions, this section is to have effect as if—

(a)
the National Crime Squad were a police force; and

(b)
references, in relation to that Squad, to its chief officer were

references to its Director General.

(7)
In subsection (5)—

(a)
“the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency” means the organisation

known by that name and established under section 36(1)(a)(ii) of

the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 (c. 77); and

(b)
“the Director” of that Agency means the person engaged on central

service (as defined by section 38(5) of that Act) and for the time

being appointed by the Scottish Ministers to exercise control in

relation to the activities carried out in the exercise of the Agency’s

functions.”

COMMONS AGREEMENT WITH AMENDMENTS

The Commons agree to this Amendment with the following Amendments—
16A
Line 3, leave out from “where” to “it” in line 4
16B
Line 5, leave out second “that” and insert “an”
16C
Line 8, after “offence” insert “is being or”
16D
Line 9, at end insert—

“( )
Before making, or applying for the making of, a control order against the

individual, the Secretary of State must consult the chief officer of the police

force about whether there is evidence available that could realistically be