Opposition to the Government's new counter-terror powers grows

Categories: Latest News
Monday January 05 2015
The Independent and Daily Telegraph report on the Home Office consultation on the provision contained in the Counter terrorism and Security Bill, currently before Parliament, to introduce a statutory requirement on “named organisations” to “help prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”. The “named organisations” which will be required to comply with the duty are “schools, colleges, universities, the police, prisons, probation providers and local government”. Failure to meet the statutory requirement would result in the Home Secretary “directing” policy thereby bypassing the institution’s independence from Government interference. The Home Office consultation details the areas to which the duty will extend: Local authorities, Higher education, Further education, Schools, the Health sector, Prisons and probation and The Police. The requirements of the duty are to:
- Establish or use existing mechanisms for understanding the risk of radicalisation;
- Ensure staff understand the risk and build the capabilities to deal with it;
- Communicate and promote the importance of the duty; and
- Ensure staff implement the duty effectively.
The guidance asserts that “Staff should have sufficient training to be able to recognise vulnerability to being drawn into terrorism, and be aware of what action to take to take in response.” Both The Independent and Daily Telegraph note the objection of human rights campaigners and the teaching profession to the proposals which could turn swathes ofpublic servants into “spies”. General secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), Russell Hobby, told the Daily Telegraph: “It’s really important that nurseries are able to establish a strong relationship of trust with families, as they are often the first experience the families will have of the education system. “Any suspicions that they are evaluating families for ideology could be quite counterproductive. “Nursery settings should focus on the foundations of literacy and socialising with other children – those are the real ‘protections’.” Past attempts by the Government to draw institutions into the Prevent programme has elicited strong criticisms with universities, in particular, denouncing plans calling on professors to identify extremists as “stupid”. It is likely that concerns that have been expressed in the past by sectors such as universities, colleges and schools will resurface given that similar ground is being trodden in the new proposed duty. The involvement of counter-terrorism police in profiling Muslim nursery children, the violation of privacy rights through the sharing of sensitive personal information, allegations of “spying” on innocent British Muslims and “mapping” Muslim communities, as well as the detention of a Muslim researcheron suspicion of terrorism after he accessed sensitive material online at his university for his research studies, will deservedly invite some fear over the proposed new powers envisaged and the potential for abuse by the authorities.