Clause 3
Counter-Terrorism Bill
11:15 am
David Heath (Somerton and Frome, Liberal Democrat)
Perhaps I can add a concern of mine on this issue. Far be it for me to have sleepless nights over whether the Government will fall foul of ECHR provisions, but as the Minister knows, it is possible that this part of the Bill will. [ Interruption. ] The Minister huffs and puffs and says “No,” but the Home Department has already lost a case on this specific point. It would be wise for the Home Department to at least consider the possibility that occasionally it may be wrong in advance of going before a court. He will know about Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Daly, 2001, a case about the blanket seizure of documents in the context of the Prison Service. The House of Lords unanimously held that including legally privileged documents in that was a breach of the appellant’s right under article 8(1), quite apart from other provisions. Therefore, if we can safeguard the Government’s intention in that respect while maintaining the rights of the citizen under human rights legislation, that would be to the advantage of what the Minister is trying to achieve, rather than to its detriment. The provisions will achieve very little if the first case that comes up is immediately taken to the courts as a breach of human rights legislation and the Home Department yet again loses its case.