Counterterrorism And The Comparative Law Of Investigative Detention

Counterterrorism and Investigative Detention explores the practice of investigative detention of terrorist suspects in the legal systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. In addition to illuminating the characteristics, capabilities, and limitations of various investigative detention regimes, this book examines ways in which international law and national security imperatives have served as vectors for change and convergence in these otherwise divergent legal systems.

"A must read and a breakthrough work ... The book makes clear the importance of comparing, learning from, and adapting legal systems to the ever-changing world, while maintaining the integrity of the Constitution. The subtlety of the book shows deep understanding of these legal regimes, something most legal analysts and policy makers from both systems sorely lack ... a most timely and valuable analysis."- Prof. Christopher L. Blakesley, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and author of Terrorism and Anti-Terrorism: A Normative and Practical Assessment "A careful and authoritative account of the controversial practice of investigative detention as a tool for responding to terrorism in a post-September 11th world. Informed by an impressive knowledge of American, British, and French law, Stigall's book reflects a distinctive comparative perspective. It deserves to be read not only by scholars and students in the field but also by policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic." - Prof. Stuart P. Green, Rutgers School of Law-Newark "Dan Stigall's analysis highlights the danger of dismissing a comparative approach, for he has most effectively used the British and French experience in discussing detention. While no regime has the answer (an illusion, at best), democratic nations can well learn from each other's successes and failures. Precisely for that reason, policy makers, jurists, and the concerned public owe Dan a collective thanks; in addressing the extraordinarily complicated issue of detention from a comparative perspective, he has truly bitten off a very large bite of a problematic apple. That he has done so is to our benefit; that he has done so successfully is to his credit. While we shall continue to struggle with the limits of detention and what legal paradigm is the "correct" one, we are the richer for Dan's book. It can serve as an effective "guide" as we continue to traverse the never-ending field of terrorism and counterterrorism." - Amos N. Guiora, Professor of Law, S. J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah

Counterterrorism and Investigative Detention explores the practice of investigative detention of terrorist suspects in the legal systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. In addition to illuminating the characteristics, capabilities, and limitations of various investigative detention regimes, this book examines ways in which international law and national security imperatives have served as vectors for change and convergence in these otherwise divergent legal systems. The chapters include an examination of the way in which each country has experienced and confronted terrorism; an overview of each country's legal system; a detailed analysis of each country's counterterrorism laws; and a discussion of the ways in which international law has impacted their respective counterterrorism approaches. This book, therefore, is situated at the nexus of comparative law, international law, and national security, providing scholars and policymakers with insight into how different countries with contrasting legal traditions address a common national security threat. This compelling discussion of how different legal systems use their detention laws to address the threat of terrorism will be of interest to comparative lawyers, international lawyers, and national security professionals.

Government responses to terrorism can conflict with the protection of human rights and the rule of law. By comprehensively looking at all aspects of counter-terrorism measures from a comparative perspective, this book identifies best practices and makes clear recommendations for the future.

Terrorism law is as international as it is regionally distinct and as difficult to define as it is essential to address. Given recent pressures to harmonize terrorism laws from international organizations like the United Nations Security Council, the Financial Action Task Force, and the Council of Europe, this book presents readers with an up-to-date assessment of terrorism law across the globe. Covering twenty-two jurisdictions across six continents, the common framework used for each chapter facilitates national comparisons of a range of laws including relevant criminal, administrative, financial, secrecy, and military laws. Recognizing that similar laws may yield different outcomes when transplanted into new contexts, priority of place is given to examples of real-world application. Including a thematic introduction and conclusion, this book will help to establish comparative counter-terrorism law as an emerging discipline crossing the boundaries of domestic and international law.

In a regional, national and global response to terrorism, the emphasis necessarily lies on preventing the next terrorist act. Yet, with prevention comes prediction: the need to identify and detain those considered likely to engage in a terrorist act in the future. The detention of ‘suspected terrorists’ is intended, therefore, to thwart a potential terrorist act recognising that retrospective action is of no consequence given the severity of terrorist crime. Although preventative steps against those reasonably suspected to have an intention to commit a terrorist act is sound counter-terrorism policy, a law allowing arbitrary arrest and detention is not. A State must carefully enact anti-terrorism laws to ensure that preventative detention does not wrongly accuse and grossly slander an innocent person, nor allow a terrorist to evade detection. This book examines whether the preventative detention of suspected terrorists in State counter-terrorism policy is consistent with the prohibitions on arbitrary arrest and detention in international human rights law. This examination is based on the ‘principle of proportionality’; a principle underlying the prohibition on arbitrary arrest as universally protected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and given effect to internationally in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and regionally in regional instruments including the European Convention on Human Rights. The book is written from a global counter-terrorism perspective, drawing particularly on examples of preventative detention from the UK, US and Australia, as well as jurisprudence from the ECHR.

Preventive detention as a counter-terrorism tool is fraught with conceptual and procedural problems and risks of misuse, excess and abuse. Many have debated the inadequacies of the current legal frameworks for detention, and the need for finding the most appropriate legal model to govern detention of terror suspects that might serve as a global paradigm. This book offers a comprehensive and critical analysis of the detention of terror suspects under domestic criminal law, the law of armed conflict and international human rights law. The book looks comparatively at the law in a number of key jurisdictions including the USA, the UK, Israel, France, India, Australia and Canada and in turn compares this to preventive detention under the law of armed conflict and various human rights treaties. The book demonstrates that the procedures governing the use of preventive detention are deficient in each framework and that these deficiencies often have an adverse and serious impact on the human rights of detainees, thereby delegitimizing the use of preventive detention. Based on her investigation Diane Webber puts forward a new approach to preventive detention, setting out ten key minimum criteria drawn from international human rights principles and best practices from domestic laws. The minimum criteria are designed to cure the current flaws and deficiencies and provide a base line of guidance for the many countries that choose to use preventive detention, in a way that both respects human rights and maintains security.