Securing liberty in the face of terror: Reflections from criminal justice

Journal of Law and Society

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 507-533

  Zedner, Lucia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 28844490622     PISSN: 0263323X     EISSN: 14676478     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6478.2005.00336.x     Document Type: Review

References (94)

1. A. Ashworth, The Criminal Process: An Evaluative Study (1998, 2nd edn.) 315-16 and 306 ff.
2. See, also, C. Walker, 'Terrorism and Criminal Justice: Past, Present and Future' (2004) Crim. Law Rev. 311-27.
3. As made, for example, by Ackerman who asserts that the seriousness of the present terrorist threat is such as to go beyond the criminal law. B. Ackerman, 'The Emergency Constitution' (2004) 113 Yale Law J. 1029-91, at 1034.
4. Writing in the Financial Times just two days after 9/11, Ignatieff insisted America 'must ask itself what balance it should keep between liberty and security in the battle with terrorism.' M. Ignatieff, 'Paying for Security with Liberty' Financial Times, 13 September 2001.
5. R. Dworkin, 'The Threat to Patriotism' (2002) 49 New York Rev. of Books; R. Dworkin, 'Terror and the Attack on Civil Liberties' (2003) 50 New York Rev. of Books.
6. S. Schulhofer, 'Liberty and Security After September 11' (2003) 14 American Prospect
7. J. Waldron, 'Security and Liberty: The Image of Balance' (2003) 11 J. of Political Philosophy 191-210.
8. See, for example, articles in the special issue of the Harvard J. of Law and Public Policy (2002), especially those by Dinh and Heymann. See, also, D. Cole and J.D. Cole, Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security (2002);
9. D. Cole, Enemy Aliens (2003);
10. M. Ignatieff, The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror (2004);
11. A. Etzioni, How Patriotic is the Patriot Act?: Freedom Versus Security in the Age of Terrorism (2004).
12. P. Thomas, 'Emergency and Anti-Terrorist Powers 9/11: USA and UK' (2003) 26 Fordham International Law J. 1193-233, at 1208.
13. R. Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously (1977) 198.
14. A. Ashworth, 'Criminal Proceedings after the Human Rights Act: The First Year' (2001) Crim. Law Rev. 855-72.
15. Notoriously in the case of the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice 1993, the balancing of interests was advanced as a key justification for the recommendations made, though little attention was given to what exactly was being balanced or in whose interests. Report of the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice (1993; Cm. 2263).
16. Ashworth, op. cit., n. 1, p. 30.
17. On the means by which balancing might be subject to 'a more rigorous and structured approach' see A. Ashworth, Human Rights, Serious Crime and Criminal Procedure (2002) ch. 3, 'Taking a "Balanced" View of the Public Interest'.
18. V. Dinh, 'Freedom and Security after September 11' (2002) 25 Harvard J. of Law and Public Policy 399-406;
19. Ackerman, op. cit., n. 3, at p. 1036.
20. See C. Gearty, 'Terrorism and human rights: a case study in impending legal realities' (1999) 19 Legal Studies 367-79, at 371.
21. Dworkin, op. cit. (2002), n. 5.
22. A definition that Fenwick condemns as 'immensely broad and imprecise'. H. Fenwick, "The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001: A Proportionate Response to 11 September?' (2002) 65 Modern Law Rev. 724-62, at 734.
23. Home Office press release 'Broadening powers to tackle extremism' (118/2005, 5 August 2005) at 〈http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/〉.
24. PM's press conference, 5 August 2005, at 〈www.direct.gov.uk〉
25. A. Simpson, 346 H.C. Debs., col. 394 (15 March 2000).
26. Quoted in Fenwick, op. cit., n. 17, at p. 734.
27. P. O'Malley, 'Risk, Power, and Crime Prevention' (1992) 21 Economy and Society 252-75;
28. M. Brown, 'Calculations of Risk in Contemporary Penal Practice' in Dangerous Offenders, ed. M. Brown (2000);
29. D. Garland, 'The Rise of Risk' in Risk and Morality, eds. R. Ericson and A. Doyle (2003).
30. 21 Ibid.
31. For example, J. Floud, 'Dangerousness and Criminal Justice' (1982) 22 Brit. J. of Crim. 213-28;
32. A.E. Bottoms and R. Brownsword, "The Dangerousness Debate after the Floud Report' (1982) 22 Brit. J. of Crim. 229-54.
33. R. Hood, S. Shute, M. Feilzer, and A. Wilcox, 'Sex Offenders Emerging from Long-Term Imprisonment: A Study of Their Long-Term Reconviction Rates and of Parole Board Members' Judgements of Their Risk' (2002) 42 Brit. J. of Crim. 371-94.
34. P. Heymann, 'Civil Liberties and Human Rights in the Aftermath of September 11' (2002) 25 Harvard J. of Law and Public Policy 441-56;
35. Waldron, op. cit., n. 7, at p. 201.
36. Dworkin, op. cit. (2003), n. 5.
37. Home Office, Justice for All (2002) 14.
38. Heymann, op. cit., n. 23, at p. 446.
39. Waldron, op. cit., n. 7, at p. 203.
40. Dinh, op. cit., n. 14, at pp. 400-1.
41. D. Dixon, Law in Policing: Legal Regulation and Police Practices (1997) 283.
42. O. Gross, 'Chaos and Rules: Should Responses to Violent Crises Always Be Constitutional?' (2003) 112 Yale Law J. 1011-134, at 1082-9.
43. J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1973) ch. 1.
44. A counterview, put to me by Timothy Endicott, is that Rawls's original position might actually lead us to sacrifice others if the odds are sufficiently good of our escaping the burdens we license. A stronger claim might therefore be that we ought not, as a matter of principle, to tolerate such sacrifice.
45. Gross, op. cit., n. 30, at p. 1090.
46. O. Gross, 'Cutting Down Trees: Law-Making Under the Shadow of Great Calamities' in The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill. ed. K. Roach (2001) 47.
47. Heymann, op. cit., n. 23, at pp. 440 ff.
48. Fenwick, op. cit., n. 17, at p. 727.
49. As do present government proposals for further anti-terrorist legislation, see Home Office, op. cit., n. 18
50. Gross, op. cit., n. 30.
51. See R. Sparks, 'Perspectives on Risk and Penal Politics' in Crime, Risk and Insecurity: Law and Order in Everyday Life and Political Discourse, ed. R. Sparks (2000).
52. For example, the concept of Human Security widens the security agenda beyond national security and the military defence of state boundaries. Human Security fuses ideas from international relations and development studies to foster a new focus on people rather than states. UN Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now (2003).
53. L. Zedner, 'The concept of security: an agenda for comparative analysis' (2003) 23 Legal Studies 153-76, at 154.
54. id., pp. 154-66.
55. Waldron, op. cit., n. 7, at p. 209.
56. Thomas, op. cit., n. 9, at p. 1198.
57. Waldron, op. cit., n. 7, at p. 209.
58. Ackerman, op. cit., n. 3, at p. 1037.
59. Heymann, op. cit., n. 23, at p. 455.
60. M. Innes, 'Reinventing tradition? Reassurance, neighbourhood security and policing' (2004) 4 Crim. Justice 151-71, at 168.
61. J. Braithwaite and P. Pettit, Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Justice (1990) 64.
62. Zedner, op. cit., n. 40, at p. 157;
63. L. Freedman, 'The Concept of Security' in Encyclopedia of Government and Politics, eds. M. Hawkesworth and M. Kogan (1992) 732.
64. Gross, op. cit., n. 30, at p. 1090.
65. Thomas, op. cit., n. 9, at pp. 1205-6.
66. N. Christie, Crime Control as Industry (1994).
67. See Hamdi v. Rumsfeld; Rasul v. Bush; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, at 〈http://www.supremecourtus.gov/〉.
68. I. Loader, 'Consumer Culture and the Commodification of Policing and Security' (1999) 33 Sociology 373-92;
69. L. Zedner, 'Too much security?' (2003) 31 International J. of the Sociology of Law 155-84.
70. Ashworth, op. cit., n. 1, pp. 306 ff.
71. L. Lazarus, Contrasting Prisoners' Rights (2004) 133-46, 163-91. Take, for example, the government's willingness to contemplate deporting terrorist suspects to countries known to engage in torture in contravention of Article 3: Up to now, the concern has been that orders for deportation will be struck down as contrary to article 3 of the ECHR ⋯ in view of the changed conditions in Britain. Should legal obstacles arise, we will legislate further, including, if necessary amending the Human Rights Act, in respect of the interpretation of the ECHR. Prime Minister's statement on anti-terror measures, 5 August 2005.
72. Dworkin, op. cit., n. 10, p. 199.
73. id.
74. id., p. 191.
75. For the United States debate, see Ackerman, op. cit., n. 3;
76. L. Tribe and P. Gudridge, 'The Anti-Emergency Constitution' (2004) 113 Yale Law J. 1801-70.
77. Dworkin, op. cit., n. 10, p. 199.
78. O. Gross, 'Are Torture Warrants Warranted? Pragmatic Absolutism and Official Disobedience' (2004) 88 Minnesota Law Rev. 101-75, at 113.
79. A. Dershowitz, Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge (2003).
80. Gross, op. cit., n. 62.
81. D. Rose, Guantanamo: America's War on Human Rights (2004) 122, citing the psychiatrist Gisli Gudjonsson.
82. On the question of effectiveness, see, also, Thomas, op. cit., n. 9, at pp. 1222 ff.
83. Ashworth, op. cit., n. 1, p. 30.
84. Ashworth, op. cit., n. 13, p. 76.
85. ECHR Article 8 1. 'Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.' P. Roberts, 'Privacy, Autonomy and Criminal Justice Rights: Philosophical Preliminaries' in Personal Autonomy: the Private Sphere and Criminal Law: a comparative study, eds. P. Alldridge and C. Brants (2001).
86. A. von Hirsch, 'The Ethics of Public Television Surveillance' in Ethical and Social Perspectives on Situational Crime Prevention, eds. A. von Hirsch, D. Garland, and A. Wakefield (2000) 66.
87. For a strikingly dispassionate and sophisticated dissection of the crime/war distinction, see N. Feldman, 'Choices of Law, Choices of War' (2002) 25 Harvard J. of Law and Public Policy 457-85.
88. Dworkin, op. cit. (2002), n. 5.
89. J. Huysmans, 'Minding Exceptions: The Politics of Insecurity and Liberal Democracy' (2004) 3 Contemporary Political Theory 321-41.
90. Thomas, op. cit., n. 9, at pp. 1216-22.
91. A. Tomkins, 'Readings of A v Secretary of State for the Home Department' [2005] Public Law 259. Article 15 provides for derogation from the Convention 'in time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation'.
92. N. Katyal and L. Tribe, 'Waging war, deciding guilt: Trying the military tribunals' (2002) 111 Yale Law J. 1259-310;
93. L. Tribe and P. Gudridge, 'The Anti-Emergency Constitution' (2004) 113 Yale Law J. 1801-70.
94. An alternative approach offered by Feldman is to distinguish categorically between legal characteristics of acts of crime and of war, to which end he outlines four defining criteria: identity, provenance, intentionality, and scale by which to determine the appropriate legal domain. Feldman, op. cit., n. 71.