Terror suspects may opt for jail

TWO terrorism suspects may choose to remain in prison rather than be subjected to new house arrest restrictions, their lawyer told a special court yesterday.

The men’s position is another blow to the government’s attempts to find a solution for individuals it regards as a threat to national security but has no evidence to convict.

Ben Emmerson, the QC for two Algerian men, known only as A and P, told a hearing of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) yesterday that bail conditions requested by the Home Office conflicted with human rights legislation.

"This would be replacing one type of indefinite detention without trial with another," he said.

In December, in a landmark decision that has forced the Home Secretary to reconsider the fate of detainees, the House of Lords ruled that the anti- terrorism measures used to intern 12 men without trial were incompatible with human rights laws.

Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, has said that his new proposed "control orders", imposing a range of restrictions up to house arrest, would be enough to protect the public.

Yesterday, the SIAC granted bail to Abu Rideh, one of the first foreign nationals to be detained under anti-terrorism laws, but the commission has yet to decide on bail conditions for him or any other detainees.

Rideh, 37, will remain at the high-security Broadmoor psychiatric hospital, where he has been since his mental health deteriorated at Belmarsh Prison, until a decision has been reached.

Claims against him include that he made public threats to carry out a bombing and that he was involved with associates of Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, in Britain and abroad. He says the allegations are "lies" and that, when he was in Afghanistan, he was setting up a charitable school for children rather than mingling with terrorists.

Lawyers for the Home Office said it was not refusing bail for any of the detainees, but requested that they be placed under similarly stringent conditions as those applied to G, the first of the 12 to be freed on bail last April.

Mr Emmerson said the House of Lords’ decision had "changed the legal landscape". He argued that, in the case of P - who is suffering a depressive illness and is a double amputee with no family - it would be "inhuman and extremely dangerous" to place him under such conditions. P is alleged to have given "logistical support" to Islamist networks, providing material support to terrorist cells planning attacks in Britain.

He said that A, who has five children he has been separated from since he was first detained three years ago, would be placed in an "agonising moral dilemma" if he was to accept bail under such conditions. A is accused of belonging to a terrorist group, carrying out fraud and using the money to buy satellite phones in Britain.

Mr Emmerson said conditions placed on G had left him with a sense of "isolation and claustrophobia" which has put an "intolerable burden on his family".

G, an alleged member of a terrorist group who was freed on mental-health grounds, is under house arrest, has an electronic tag, cannot use the internet and must report to a monitoring service five times a day. He cannot leave his flat or have visitors without Home Office approval in advance.

Mr Emmerson said: "Whether the detention is in Belmarsh Prison or in a flat at Bermondsey it’s still indefinite detention without trial on suspicion alone."

He said that A and P would be guinea pigs for Mr Clarke’s proposals announced last week to replace detention of terror suspects without trial with a system of control orders.