Proceeding contribution from Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 25 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill 2005-06.
Terrorism Bill
My Lords, I understand why the noble Lord tempts me down that line but it is right that in exercising his or her discretion, the Attorney-General should be able to take into consideration those matters which are pertinent at the time. One of those matters would have to be the circumstances of the alleged offence and the countries in which those acts or omissions take place. I do not think that it would be right for me to go further than that. I have very much in mind that in this country—the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, alluded to it—we have been blessed with some rigorous and robust holders of that office. To name but a few, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mayhew of Twysden, discharged his duty with a great deal of distinction; we were blessed with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lyell, and my noble and learned friend Lord Morris of Aberavon. We are blessed at present with a particularly distinguished Attorney-General. We can be confident that those who have been appointed to that post will continue to discharge their duties with honour. I repeat that it is important for us to look at the bigger picture. The implication of the amendments is that there may be certain circumstances when acts of terrorism may be more acceptable than in others. In Committee, the noble Baroness, Lady Williams of Crosby, referred to South Africa under apartheid, Greece under the colonels, Rwanda and Serbia. She also talked about countries where there is no other channel of legitimate opposition—very much the theme of those who have spoken today. All of that ties into the wider debate on whether it is possible to draw a distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters and the definition of terrorism. As we have discussed previously, the Government do not believe that it will necessarily be possible to come up with a better definition of terrorism than the one we have already in our legislation. However, as I have indicated, we need carefully to consider the issue. We shall do so when the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, concludes his review. I am grateful to the noble Baroness and the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, because this and the next group of amendments give us an opportunity to explore what we know to be a delicate and difficult area. But I invite the noble Baroness and the noble Lord not to press the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 677 c1193-4
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Civil liberties Codes of practice Detainees Companies Assets Human rights Genocide National security Police Powers Nuclear weapons Police custody Terrorism Training
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 09:33:30 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294595
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294595
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294595