Please note: this observatory is no longer updated.
"We will be strong in defence of freedom. The Government believes that the British state has become too authoritarian, and that over the past decade it has abused and eroded fundamental human freedoms and historic civil liberties. We need to restore the rights of individuals in the face of encroaching state power, in keeping with Britain’s tradition of freedom and fairness."
Coalition programme for government (see p11, link, pdf) published by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister 20 May 2010
In another U-turn on civil liberties, the government is introducing emergency legislation that will allow it to impose on terrorism suspects many of the draconian restrictions they had promised to do away with.
The Coalition government's commitment to restore freedom and rights i the face of increasing state power is thrown into question by the heavy-handed response to small protests on the day of the royal wedding.
A July 2011 High Court judgement has paved the way for the routine blocking of websites accused of infringing copyright. In a landmark test case of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA), for the first time in the UK a judge ruled that an internet service provider (ISP) must stop its subscribers accessing a website. The establishment of this legal precedent has allowed the government to abandon the website blocking provisions of the Digital Economy Act (DEA), which have proven to be poorly drafted and difficult to implement, without drawing the ire of creative industry copyright holders who lobbied fervently for its introduction.
The recommendations of the counter-terrorism and security powers review undermine the coalition government’s commitment to restore “hard-won British liberties.”
"Thousands of innocent people are to be removed from the UK national DNA database, but alarmingly their records will still be held on the Police National Computer."
"Control orders have been abolished in name alone: amended, not replaced. Crucially, TPIMs will retain its predecessor's most objectionable characteristic of operating outside the criminal justice system and bypassing judicial process. Under the new system individuals will continue to be punished without charge or trial on the basis of secret evidence heard in closed courts that they are not permitted to hear or contest. TPIMs will restrict suspects' civil liberties less severely than control orders currently do, but the new system will continue to undermine the presumption of innocence and remains an inadequate substitute to a fair trial."
January 2011: Statewatch analysis: Six months on: An update on the UK coalition government’s commitment to civil liberties (pdf) by Max Rowlands
Statewatch publishes a follow-up to its June 2010 Analysis (see below) of the coalition government's commitment to civil liberties:
Within weeks of its formation in May 2010, the coalition government announced with much fanfare its intention “to restore the rights of individuals in the face of encroaching state power.” An easy victory over Labour’s politically bankrupt National Identity Scheme followed, but since then the government’s approach has been characterised by caution and pragmatism rather than an unerring commitment to liberty.
This is largely because there are splits within government on many of the key civil liberties issues that fundamentally define the relationship between citizen and state: how long and under what conditions can the government detain us, to what extent should the state surveil us, and what data on us should it hold? These internal divisions have been compounded by significant pressure from the civil service and security agencies to retain Labour policies that served to empower them.
On intrinsically divisive topics such as the future of the Human Rights Act and counter-terrorism legislation, commissions of enquiry have been used as a stalling tactic to avoid creating friction within the coalition and to provide time during which common ground can be found. Difficult decisions cannot be delayed indefinitely and it remains unclear which party will hold sway. The contents of the much anticipated Freedom Bill will go a long way towards revealing the extent of the coalition’s commitment to civil liberties.
The government's review of counter terrorism and security powers has confirmed that, like control orders section 44 stop and search powers are to be redesigned and reintroduced with a new name and a more tightly defined legal basis.
See also: Who'll stand up for liberty in Britain? by David Edgar (Guardian, link)
June 2010: Statewatch Analysis: Rolling back the authoritarian state? An analysis of the coalition government’s commitment to civil liberties (pdf) by Max Rowlands
The firm commitment to civil liberties made by the UK’s new Conservative led coalition government has given civil liberty campaigners reason to be encouraged. It comes from the full-text of the coalition agreement, titled The Coalition: our programme for government, published by David Cameron and Nick Clegg on 20 May 2010. It is accompanied by a number of specific commitments to address the considerable damage done by New Labour’s 13-year assault on civil liberties. The wording is vague, and a number of the outgoing government’s most unsavoury enactments have not been adequately addressed, but crucially the new UK government has acknowledged that a problem exists.
Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.
Statewatch does not have a corporate view, nor does it seek to create one, the views expressed are those of the author. Statewatch is not responsible for the content of external websites and inclusion of a link does not constitute an endorsement. Registered UK charity number: 1154784. Registered UK company number: 08480724. Registered company name: The Libertarian Research & Education Trust. Registered office: MayDay Rooms, 88 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1DH. © Statewatch ISSN 1756-851X. Personal usage as private individuals "fair dealing" is allowed. We also welcome links to material on our site. Usage by those working for organisations is allowed only if the organisation holds an appropriate licence from the relevant reprographic rights organisation (eg: Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK) with such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that licence and to local copyright law.