Peter Goldsmith: Terror suspects have rights, but so do other citizens

From a speech given to the Royal Institute of International Affairs by the Attorney General

Friday 13 February 2004 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The state has dual responsibilities: to protect its citizens and their property from terrorist attack and to guarantee the fundamental rights of those within its jurisdiction.

But after that uncontroversial start we soon get into choppier waters. How do we balance these two objectives, which will often conflict? It is a hard balance, and extraordinary times will justify it being struck in different ways. Surely we should be prepared to accept more intrusion into our personal lives through more sharing of information between public agencies if that is needed to detect and prevent more terrorist attacks or bring to justice those responsible?

But there remain certain rights which will be non-negotiable. So there is a place for debate about the proper limits of action and whether government has gone too far. But too often the criticism of government action in relation to terrorism does not get beyond rhetoric. It does not recognise that new challenges must be faced.

While the terrorist does not forfeit his fundamental rights, the law does recognise that those rights can be restricted or derogated from in particular circumstances. Rights are not only one-way. It is not only the rights of suspected persons which are important. The rights and liberties of other citizens are important too.

In order to combat terrorism effectively and defend the rights of society, we need to be flexible and imaginative in our approach to legal process and recognise that some restriction on fundamental rights may well be required.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in