<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/7514303/Terror-threat-questioned-by-committee.html>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/7514303/Terror-threat-questioned-by-committee.html Terror threat questioned by committee The terror threat facing the UK has been overstated by the Government since the 9/11 attacks in America, a group of MPs and peers signal today. By Tom Whitehead <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/tom-whitehead/>, Home Affairs Editor Published: 7:30AM GMT 25 Mar 2010 A report questions claims that the country has faced a "public emergency" every year since 2001 and calls for a complete review of counter-terrorism measures and whether they are all still justified. The parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also warns the Government's "narrow" definition of what it considers being complicit in torture could be unlawful. It said it could find no legal basis for the position presented by ministers which it described as "significant and worrying". The report added that the case is now "irresistible" for an independent inquiry in the allegations raised by Binyam Mohamed, who alleged Britain was complicit in his torture because an MI5 officer helped prepare questions for his interrogators. In an examination of counter-terrorism measures taken by the Government, the Committee, which is made up of peers and MPs, said:"The Government states that 'the protection of human rights is a key principle underpinning all the Government’s counter-terrorism work'. "However, all too often human rights considerations are squeezed out by the imperatives of national security and public safety." It concluded: "Since September 11th 2001 the Government has continuously justified many of its counter-terrorism measures on the basis that there is a public emergency threatening the life of the nation. We question whether the country has been in such a state for more than eight years. "This permanent state of emergency inevitably has a deleterious effect on public debate about the justification for counter-terrorism measures." Andrew Dismore, chairman of the committee, said: "There is no question that we face a serious threat from terrorism or that we need legislation to counter that threat. "The question is, are the counterterror measures we have in place justifiable, on an ongoing basis, in light of the most up to date information we have. "The idea that we have consistently faced an emergency level threat for over eight years since September 11 is, we believe, questionable." The committee also raised concerns over a Government definition of complicity in torture, which is quoted as "The Government's position is that the receipt of intelligence should not occur where it is known or believed that receipt would amount to encouragement to the intelligence services of other states to commit torture". The report said that was a "new formulation" and meant it changed the Government's position from having the onus on British officials having to know or suspect evidence has been obtained by torture to only worrying about whether taking that information could encourage torture in the future. The Committee said: "We cannot find any legal basis for the Government's narrow formulation of the meaning of complicity." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/7514303/Terror-threat-questioned-by-committee.html
