Government plans to increase the time terror suspects can be held without charge from 28 to 42 days have been condemned as 'flawed' and 'blatantly politically slanted' by solicitors.


The Counter-Terrorism Bill, published last week, also proposes allowing post-charge questioning of suspects and making terrorism an 'aggravating factor' in sentencing.



Human rights solicitor Louise Christian, senior partner at London firm Christian Khan, said plans to require Parliament to approve any extension of an individual's detention within 30 days were 'ridiculous', as a suspect could have already been held for 42 days by the time they voted.



She said: 'The legislation is flawed and blatantly politically slanted. If you're talking about offences on the periphery which don't mean engaging in terrorism... [such as] possession of propaganda items, it's difficult to see how these are more serious crimes than serial murder and rape.'



Ms Christian added that post-charge questioning was originally intended as a means of avoiding holding suspects without charge for long periods. If used on a day-to-day basis, she said, 'it could be abused and used to browbeat people into pleading guilty to a lesser charge'.



Michael Ellman, chairman of the Solicitors International Human Rights Group, said: 'We are the only country in the western world that has more than 14 days' detention without charge. It is quite unacceptable and a breach of our international obligations.'



Law Society President Andrew Holroyd said the government should not restrict liberty by extending detention without charge based on 'hypothetical scenarios', adding that the proposed parliamentary oversight is 'unlikely to be an effective safeguard'. However, he said it was right that terrorism should be an aggravating factor in sentencing.



A Home Office spokeswoman said the Bill balances the need to protect individual human rights against providing the police with the powers they need to deal with terrorism.



See Comment, page 14



Anita Rice