Stone, Richard (2006) Police powers and human rights in the context of terrorism. Managerial Law, 48 (4). pp. 384-399. ISSN 0309-0558

Preview

HTML terrorismarticle_(3).pdf Download (122Kb)

Abstract

Purpose – The object of the paper is to analyse the justifications for the modification of police powers in response to terrorist threats, placing this issue in a European context. Design/methodology/approach – The paper consists of a critical examination of provisions relating to terrorism emanating from the European Union and the Council of Europe (European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)), and the relevant English law on police powers of stop and search, arrest, and detention. Findings – Nothing in European law requires the amendments to police powers contained in English law; European law requires respect for human rights, even in dealing with terrorism; a shoot-to-kill policy is prohibited by the ECHR; and balance is an unsatisfactory method of resolving conflicts in this area. Research limitations/implications – The research was limited in its scope to certain areas of police powers, and to certain fundamental European documents. Future research should consider the issue in relation to wider areas. Originality/value – It challenges the idea of balance between liberty and security, proposing a test based on necessity instead.

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	Purpose – The object of the paper is to analyse the justifications for the modification of police powers in response to terrorist threats, placing this issue in a European context. Design/methodology/approach – The paper consists of a critical examination of provisions relating to terrorism emanating from the European Union and the Council of Europe (European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)), and the relevant English law on police powers of stop and search, arrest, and detention. Findings – Nothing in European law requires the amendments to police powers contained in English law; European law requires respect for human rights, even in dealing with terrorism; a shoot-to-kill policy is prohibited by the ECHR; and balance is an unsatisfactory method of resolving conflicts in this area. Research limitations/implications – The research was limited in its scope to certain areas of police powers, and to certain fundamental European documents. Future research should consider the issue in relation to wider areas. Originality/value – It challenges the idea of balance between liberty and security, proposing a test based on necessity instead.
Keywords:	Terrorism, Human rights, European law, police
Subjects:	M Law > M210 Public Law
Divisions:	College of Social Sciences > Faculty of Business & Law > Lincoln Law School
Depositing User:	Richard Stone
Date Deposited:	03 Aug 2010 11:55
Last Modified:	13 Mar 2013 08:44
URI:	http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/id/eprint/3144

Actions (login required)

View Item