The Civil Contingencies Bill Must Not Go Through!

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

The Civil Contingencies Bill Must Not Go Through!

With the government’s legislative proposal to introduce the Civil Contingencies Bill, the state is storing up for itself yet more far-reaching powers to legitimise arbitrary assaults on the rights of the people as a whole. It is doing so under the signboard of the "fight against terrorism" and of impending national crisis and emergency.

The Draft Bill was published in June, and the final Bill as proposed in the Queen’s Speech has not yet been published. The Draft Bill had included a clause that gave the government to suspend parts or all of the Human Rights Act without a vote by parliament. Using the royal prerogative, the government could order the destruction of property, order people to evacuate an area or ban them from travelling, and "prohibit assemblies of specified kinds" and "other specified activities". This has met such opposition that the government has hinted that such emergency regulations could be challenged if they breached the European Convention on Human Rights, which the Human Rights Act enshrines. However, it should be remembered that the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 contained a declaration that it complied with the Convention, through the expedient of specifically opting out of its provision relating to detention without trial by declaring a "public emergency".

On November 28, the Joint Committee on the Draft Civil Contingencies Bill (of Commons and Lords) published a report which concluded that the proposed Civil Contingencies Bill means: "Our democracy and civil liberties could be in danger." The Committee's report says: "We recommend the bill explicitly prohibit regulations which would contravene any inalienable rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights or the Geneva Conventions... In the wrong hands, it could be used to undermine or even remove legislation underpinning the British constitution and infringe human rights."

The Draft Bill puts forward that Regulations can be made to prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, assemblies of specified kinds, at specified places or at specified times; prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, travel at specified times; prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, other specified activities; and create an offence of: (i) failing to comply with a provision of the regulations; (ii) failing to comply with a direction or order given or made under the regulations; (iii) obstructing a person in the performance of a function under or by virtue of the regulations."

This Bill adds to the Terrorism Act of 2000 and the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 in enshrining exceptional measures as permanent law. What is necessary for the government is to convince the people that "terrorism" is the main enemy, and that their elementary rights are not guaranteed since exceptional circumstances demand that they be curtailed. This is not being accepted by the people, and it is essential that the struggle against such legislation be carried through to the end, and that all such attempts by the state to act arbitrarily against the people’s rights be defeated.

Already the days when people could demonstrate without first having to seek police permission seem like a distant memory. How fraudulent was the claim of Bush and Blair that this country enjoys the freedom to demonstrate! A fierce battle had to be fought to march past parliament itself, and as it was the demonstrators were kept away from venting their anger face to face with George Bush. The Draft Bill would give the government further powers in this respect, enshrining further powers to ban demonstrations, cordoning off whole areas (as had been proposed for the whole of central London during Bush’s visit) and making anyone who travelled to protest guilty of a criminal offence. The powers of the police to act with impunity and without accountability would be increased.

The workers themselves are already subject to specific legislation to curtail their ability to act in defence of their interests and act as a united, organised force. This is not acceptable, as the further legislation to criminalise protest, dissent and the people’s struggles in defence of what is just is not acceptable. Neither can it be accepted that the decisions as to what constitutes an emergency be taken by the government under the royal prerogative in this way. The Draft Bill, for example, includes in the definition of an "emergency" any situation that "causes or may cause disruption of the activities of Her Majesty's Government".

The elementary collective rights of the people are under further attack with this Draft Bill and it must not be allowed to go through!

Notes:

1. Report by the Joint Committee on the draft Civil Contingencies Bill published 28.11.03: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/nov/jtcomcivilcontrep.pdf
2. The draft Bill and Explanatory Note: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jun/ccbill2.pdf