Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010

Last updated

Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (Variant 1, 2022).svg
Long title An Act to make provision for the temporary validity of certain Orders in Council imposing financial restrictions on, and in relation to, persons suspected of involvement in terrorist activity; and for connected purposes.
Citation 2010 c.2
Introduced by Alistair Darling [1]
Territorial extent England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
Dates
Royal assent 10 February 2010
Commencement 10 February 2010
Repealed17 December 2010
Other legislation
Repealed by Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010
Status: Repealed
Text of statute as originally enacted
Text of the Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk.

The Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010 was an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament that was in force from 10 February 2010 until its repeal on 17 December that same year by the Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010.

Contents

Summary

The Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010 was an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament to make provision for the temporary validity of certain Orders in Council imposing financial restrictions on, and in relation to, persons suspected of involvement in terrorist activity; and for connected purposes. These Orders in Council had been the chosen method of implementation of Resolution 1373 and the directives of the 1267 Committee. The legislation was introduced in the House of Commons by the Brown Government on 5 February 2010 and received royal assent on 10 February.

Judgment

The Act was passed following the HM Treasury v Ahmed ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on 27 January 2010 that asset-freezing orders made under the United Nations Act 1946 – specifically the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2009, the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2006, the Al-Qa’ida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) Order 2002, the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2001 and the Al-Qaida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) Order 2006 – were unlawful, because the 1946 Act was not intended to authorise coercive measures which interfere with fundamental rights without parliamentary scrutiny: [2]

There was no indication during the [February 1946] debates at Second Reading in either House that it was envisaged that the Security Council would find it necessary under article 41 to require states to impose restraints or take coercive measures against their own citizens. The question whether it would be appropriate, if it were to do so, for the Government to be given power to introduce such measures by Orders in Council in the manner envisaged by the Bill was not discussed.

Multiple persons, multiple orders and a forest of laws, Statutory Orders and UNSC resolutions were considered in the judgment. The applicants pleaded variously that the Treasury Orders were ultra vires for various reasons:

Lord Phillips concluded that

Nobody should conclude that the result of these appeals constitutes judicial interference with the will of Parliament. On the contrary it upholds the supremacy of Parliament in deciding whether or not measures should be imposed that affect the fundamental rights of those in this country. [3]

Legislation

When the court refused to stay its judgement on 4 February, the 2010 Act was passed to retrospectively validate the orders until Parliament could pass new asset-freezing legislation which complied with the court's judgement. [4]

Speaking in the House of Commons on 8 February, Liberal Democrat MP David Heath said of the bill:

[T]he legislation is before us because the Government have been found to be acting ultra vires and failing to secure proper parliamentary approval ... However, the arrogance of this Government and, in particular, the Treasury means that they do not understand what Parliament is for, and they do not understand the proper scrutiny of Bills. [5]

Repeal

The Act was repealed by the Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010, [6] a full legislative text with which to implement Resolution 1373.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Statutory instrument (UK)</span> Type of secondary legislation in the United Kingdom

A statutory instrument (SI) is the principal form in which delegated legislation is made in Great Britain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2001

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, adopted unanimously on 28 September 2001, is a counterterrorism measure passed following the 11 September terrorist attacks on the United States. The resolution was adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, and is therefore binding on all UN member states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom, formally introduced into Parliament on 19 November 2001, two months after the terrorist attacks in the United States on 11 September. It received royal assent and came into force on 14 December 2001. Many of its measures are not specifically related to terrorism, and a Parliamentary committee was critical of the swift timetable for such a long bill including non-emergency measures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, intended to deal with the Law Lords' ruling of 16 December 2004 that the detention without trial of eight foreigners at HM Prison Belmarsh under Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was unlawful, being incompatible with European human rights laws.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emergency Powers (Defence) Act 1939</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Emergency Powers (Defence) Act 1939 was emergency legislation passed just prior to the outbreak of World War II by the Parliament of the United Kingdom to enable the British government to take up emergency powers to prosecute the war effectively. It contained clauses giving the government wide powers to create Defence Regulations by Order in Council. These regulations governed almost every aspect of everyday life in the country during the War. Two offences under the regulations were punishable with death. Following the conclusion of the war, the 1939 Act was repealed, with the individual regulations gradually following suit. As of 2023, at least one Regulation remains in force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Terrorism Act 2006</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Terrorism Act 2006 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that received royal assent on 30 March 2006, after being introduced on 12 October 2005. The Act creates new offences related to terrorism, and amends existing ones. The Act was drafted in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 London bombings, and some of its terms have proven to be highly controversial. The government considered the act a necessary response to an unparalleled terrorist threat; it has encountered opposition from those who feel that it is an undue imposition on civil liberties, and could increase the terrorism risk.

Anti-terrorism legislation are laws with the purpose of fighting terrorism. They usually, if not always, follow specific bombings or assassinations. Anti-terrorism legislation usually includes specific amendments allowing the state to bypass its own legislation when fighting terrorism-related crimes, under alleged grounds of necessity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Asset forfeiture</span> Confiscation of assets by the state

Asset forfeiture or asset seizure is a form of confiscation of assets by the authorities. In the United States, it is a type of criminal-justice financial obligation. It typically applies to the alleged proceeds or instruments of crime. This applies, but is not limited, to terrorist activities, drug-related crimes, and other criminal and even civil offenses. Some jurisdictions specifically use the term "confiscation" instead of forfeiture. The alleged purpose of asset forfeiture is to disrupt criminal activity by confiscating assets that potentially could have been beneficial to the individual or organization.

From 2000 to 2015, the British Parliament passed a series of Terrorism Acts that were aimed at terrorism in general, rather than specifically focused on terrorism related to Northern Ireland.

The Financial Sanctions Unit of the Bank of England formerly administered financial sanctions in the United Kingdom on behalf of HM Treasury. It was in operation since before 1993, when it applied sanctions against the Government of Libya. More recently, since Libya became an ally of the United Kingdom, sanctions have been applied against those who allegedly fought against the Government of Libya at the time it was not an ally. Responsibility for the administration of Financial Sanctions in the UK transferred from the Bank of England to HM Treasury on 24 October 2007. In April 2016 HM Treasury set up the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, a new body whose mission is to "provide a high-quality service to the private sector, working closely with law enforcement to help ensure that financial sanctions are properly understood, implemented and enforced."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Act 1946</span> United Kingdom legislation

The United Nations Act 1946 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which enables His Majesty's Government to implement resolutions under Article 41 of the United Nations Charter as Orders in Council. Thus Parliament delegated the power to enact such resolutions without the approval of Parliament. However, the prospective Order must be laid before either Parliament or the Scottish Parliament. A similar mechanism was later used in the European Communities Act 1972 and the Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010.

Hani Mohammed Yusuf al-Siba'i is an Egyptian Islamic scholar who was a member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and now lives in London as a political refugee. Efforts to deport him have failed. He is a supporter of al-Qaeda and is used as a scholarly reference by the movement. The leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, listed him as one of four scholars that Muslims worldwide should follow, alongside Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, Abu Qatada and Dr. Tariq Abdelhaleem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yassin Kadi</span> Saudi Arabian businessman (born 1955)

Yassin Abdullah Kadi is a Saudi Arabian businessman. A multi-millionaire from Jeddah, Kadi trained as an architect in Chicago, Illinois. He is the son-in-law of Sheikh Ahmed Salah Jamjoom, a former Saudi Arabian government minister with close ties to the Saudi royal family.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Landsbanki Freezing Order 2008</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Landsbanki Freezing Order 2008 is an Order of HM Treasury to freeze the assets of Icelandic bank Landsbanki in the United Kingdom made under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, by virtue of the fact that the Treasury reasonably believed that "action to the detriment of the United Kingdom's economy has been or is likely to be taken by a person or persons." As required by the enabling Act, the Order was approved by both Houses of Parliament on 28 October 2008, which was 20 days after the Order had come into force.

United Nations Security Council resolution 1526, adopted unanimously on 30 January 2004, after recalling resolutions 1267 (1999), 1333 (2000), 1363 (2001), 1373 (2001), 1390 (2001), 1452 (2002) and 1455 (2003) concerning terrorism, the council tightened sanctions against Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Osama bin Laden and associated individuals and groups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1617</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2005

United Nations Security Council resolution 1617, adopted unanimously on 29 July 2005, after recalling resolutions 1267 (1999), 1333 (2000), 1363 (2001), 1373 (2001), 1390 (2001), 1452 (2002), 1455 (2003), 1526 (2004) and 1566 (2004) concerning terrorism, the Council renewed sanctions against Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Osama bin Laden and associated individuals and groups for a further seventeen months.

The Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation is appointed by the Home Secretary and by the Treasury for a renewable three-year term and tasked with reporting to the Home Secretary and to Parliament on the operation of counter-terrorism law in the UK.

<i>HM Treasury v Ahmed</i>

HM Treasury v Ahmed [2010] UKSC 2 is a UK constitutional law and human rights case concerning the United Nations Act 1946 and the powers it grants to the executive to issue terrorism control orders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Administration of Justice (Emergency Provisions) Act 1939</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Administration of Justice Act 1939 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that modified the law in England and Wales with regards to juries in England and Wales.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Anderson, Baron Anderson of Ipswich</span> British barrister and life peer (born 1961)

David William Kinloch Anderson, Baron Anderson of Ipswich, is a British barrister and life peer, who was the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation in the United Kingdom between 2011 and 2017. On 8 June 2018 it was announced that he would be introduced to the House of Lords as a cross-bench (non-party) working peer. On the same day he was appointed a Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire (KBE), for services to national security and civil liberties, in the Queen's 2018 Birthday Honours.

References

  1. "Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . House of Commons. 5 February 2010. col. 517. Archived from the original on 11 February 2010.{{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  2. supremecourt.uk: HM Treasury v Ahmed, etc, 27 Jan 2010 (vide Lord Hope at para.16)
  3. HM Treasury v Ahmed et al, para.157
  4. UK Supreme Court website [ permanent dead link ] (see 27 January 2010 cases)
  5. "Hansard - Debate". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . Vol. 505. House of Commons. 8 February 2010. col. 648. Archived from the original on 23 April 2010.{{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  6. legislation.gov.uk: PGA, 2010 c.38