The Government has published its response to the final annual report on the operation of the Terrorism Acts by David Anderson QC (see previous blog) when he was independent reviewer of terrorism legislation.
David Anderson had repeated his criticisms of the deproscription process for proscribed organisations, in particular that the continued proscription of groups that do not or no longer satisfy the statutory test that they are currently concerned in terrorism is contrary to the rule of law (see previous blog). He again proposed that proscription orders should automatically lapse after a period of time and only be renewed if there is sufficient evidence (as with terrorist asset-freezing) or that the statutory test should be amended.
The Government’s response says it is not prepared to make these changes, that it is not convinced that regular reviews of proscription decisions would prevent injustice and would have practical and financial disadvantages. It will respect the statutory time limit for deproscription applications, not met in the case of the ISYF (see previous blog).