Law Journal Library - Skip to main content
Content Start

Click here to view short-term subscription options to access this document.

25 Sing. L. Rev. 24 (2007)
Preventive Detention as a Counter-Terrorism Strategy: They Have Stopped Using It and So Should We

handle is hein.journals/singlrev25 and id is 29 raw text is: Singapore Law Review
(2007) 25 Sing.L.Rev. 24-34
The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge
known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers, is in the
highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or
These words spoken by a great leader more than 50 years ago apparently have
faded in time, as can be seen in the aftermath of the well-coordinated terrorist
attacks in the United States, when the United Kingdom's (UK) Parliament
hurriedly passed2 the Anti- Terrorism, Crime andSecurityAct20013 (A. TCS.A.),
recognised by Lord Hoffmann as a real threat to the life of the nation.4 The
A. TC.S.A. allowed for the Home Secretary to detain an alien suspected of being
a terrorist indefinitely without trial, if there was a danger he would be tortured
in his own country if deported.5 Although the House of Lords declared Part 4
Fourth year LL.B. undergraduate at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore.
This essay was awarded the fourth prize at the Singapore Law Review Writing Competition
Words of Mr (later Sir) Winston S. Churchill in relation to the power to intern 'enemy
aliens' during the Second World War, quoted in U.K., Joint Committee on Human Rights,
Continuance in force of Sections 21 to 23 of the Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001,
H.C. 462, H.L. 59 (Fifth Report of Session 2002-2003) (London: The Stationery Office
Ltd., 2003) at para. 7.
2 U.K., Select Committee on Home Affairs, The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill,
H.C. 351 (First Report of Session 2001-02) (London: The Stationery Office Ltd., 2001)
at para. 3.
3 (U.K.), 2001, c. 24.
4 A 6- others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2005] 2 A.C. 68 at para. 97
5 Supra note 3, s. 23. A decision of the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg Court)
in Chahal v. United Kingdom, [1996] 23 E.H.R.R. 413 (Chahal) rendered extradition of
a person to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that he will suffer
torture or inhumane treatment, a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention of Human
Rights. Under the Human Rights Act 1998 (U.K.), 1998, c. 42 (H.R.A.), UK courts are
bound by decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, hence deportation of an alien

Already a Subscriber?

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is the world’s largest image-based and fully searchable legal and academic research database. Material contained in HeinOnline is an exact replication of the original printed product, and coverage is typically comprehensive. Contact us today for a free demo of this incredible resource.

We offer annual subscriptions to all HeinOnline collections to universities, colleges, law firms, individuals, and other institutions. To request a quote or trial, please click here.

Please note: the content in the Law Journal Library is constantly changing and some content has restrictions as required per the license. Therefore, please review the available content via the following link to ensure the material you wish to access is included in the database. For a complete list of content included in the Law Journal Library, please click here.

Learn More About the Law Journal Library (pdf)
Back To Top Jump To Bottom