Aid workers fear jail for entering conflict zones under new terror laws proposed by government

Proposed laws ‘fail to provide sufficient protection for people who already risk their lives to help others’, prominent NGOs warn

‘Designated areas’ could include warzones where aid agencies are operating to deliver humanitarian relief (AP)

Aid workers fear being jailed for entering conflict zones under proposed new terror laws meant to target Isis fighters.

The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill would mean anyone entering a “designated area” abroad could be jailed for up to 10 years unless they can prove a “reasonable excuse” to be there.

Ministers say the proposal was designed to criminalise returning Isis fighters who cannot be prosecuted for other crimes because of a lack of proof.

But critics say the law is too broad.

In a joint statement, leaders of some of the world’s most prominent aid organisations said it would “in effect make it a criminal offence for British aid workers to provide support to vulnerable people in war torn countries”.

They added: “Unless urgently amended, the bill will fail to provide sufficient protection for people who already risk their lives to help others and could instead mean they face police interrogation and arrest on their return, even with the changes proposed by the government this week.

“This is simply unacceptable and will make it impossible for civil society organisations to deliver much-needed humanitarian, development and peace-building support to people desperately in need.”

The Independent understands that areas considered for prohibition are likely to overlap with those where the government already warns against all travel, which currently includes the whole of Syria, Yemen, Libya, parts of Iraq and other warzones.

Signatories, including the heads of charities including Christian Aid, ActionAid UK, Action Against Hunger, Bond and Oxfam, urged politicians to change the proposals.

They want aid workers, academics and journalists to be wholly exempt from the “designated areas law”.

The draft bill, which is being considered by the House of Lords, has already drawn severe criticism from MPs who demanded substantial changes to prevent human rights breaches.

Last month the Joint Committee on Human Rights called for the deletion or amendment of the “designated areas” law.

Members said the clause, which is directed at Isis territories but could cover anywhere chosen by the home secretary, does not require harm or intent to cause it.

They noted that the law was added at the Commons report stage in September after the bill had undergone its first reading, leaving “limited opportunity for scrutiny in the Commons”.

Peers have proposed a series of amendments to clarify protections offered, including some supported by the Home Office.

Extremism minister Baroness Williams has tabled a series of changes to the “designated areas” law, listing reasonable excuses as “providing aid of a humanitarian nature”, carrying out government or military work, being a journalist, attending funerals, caring for relatives or appearing in court.

Another section says the exemption “does not include the provision of aid in contravention of internationally recognised principles and standards”.

The suggested amendments would make designations expire every three years, when the area covered would have to be reviewed.

Maryam Mohsin, of the Bond international development network, said aid workers should not have to start the process from a position of guilt.

“They should be completely exempt,” she told The Independent. “They should not go through the process of being vulnerable to interrogation and being required to provide a reasonable excuse in the first place.”

A Home Office spokesperson highlighted the amendments naming humanitarian work specifically as a defence.

The added: “The offence already includes a reasonable excuse defence which will be available to individuals who travel to a designated area solely for a legitimate purpose.”

The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill would also make statements deemed to support a banned group illegal, broaden powers to stop and search people at borders without suspicion and limit access to a lawyer for those questioned and detained.

It would make accessing terrorist material online on just one occasion a criminal offence punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

The United Nations special rapporteur on the right to privacy has accused the government of straying towards “thought crime” and Max Hill QC, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation found it “difficult to countenance”.

A successor has not been appointed since Mr Hill’s departure to become the director of public prosecutions a month ago, and he raised concern about the “gap in oversight” as the bill is scrutinised.

Ben Wallace, the security minister, previously said intelligence services and police had made the case for an update of existing laws to meet their operational needs following last year’s wave of terror attacks and the Salisbury poisonings.

The number of live terror investigations are at a record high, although the majority of suspects are believed to be British citizens or long term UK residents.

Of around 900 jihadis known to have travelled to Syria and Iraq, the government estimates that 40 per cent have returned and 20 per cent have been killed in the region.