European securityEU’s counterterrorism laws are Orwellian: Amnesty

Published 17 January 2017

Sweeping new laws are driving Europe into a deep and dangerous state of permanent securitization, Amnesty International said on the publication of a comprehensive human rights analysis of counter-terrorism measures across fourteen EU member states. Amnesty International says that its latest report — Dangerously disproportionate: The ever-expanding national security state in Europe — reveals how a deluge of laws and amendments passed with break-neck speed, is undermining fundamental freedoms and dismantling hard-won human rights protections.

Sweeping new laws are driving Europe into a deep and dangerous state of permanent securitization, Amnesty International said on the publication of a comprehensive human rights analysis of counter-terrorism measures across fourteen EU member states.

Amnesty International says that its latest report — Dangerously disproportionate: The ever-expanding national security state in Europe — reveals how a deluge of laws and amendments passed with break-neck speed, is undermining fundamental freedoms and dismantling hard-won human rights protections.

“In the wake of a series of appalling attacks, from Paris to Berlin, governments have rushed through a raft of disproportionate and discriminatory laws,” said John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Director for Europe.

“Taken alone these individual counter-terrorism measures are worrying enough, but when seen together, a disturbing picture emerges in which unchecked powers are trampling freedoms that have long been taken for granted.”

The report, based on more than two years’ research across fourteen EU member states, as well as analysis of initiatives at international and European levels, reveals the extent to which new legislation and policies intended to address the threat of terrorism have steamrolled rights protections.

In several countries, counter-terrorism measures have been proposed or enacted that have eroded the rule of law, enhanced executive powers, peeled away judicial controls, restricted freedom of expression and exposed everyone to unchecked government surveillance. The impact on foreigners and ethnic and religious minorities has been particularly profound.

The new normal: Emergency laws and emergency-like measures
In several countries, constitutional amendments or legislation will make it easier to declare a formal state of emergency or grant special powers to security and intelligence services often with little or no judicial oversight.

For example, new legislation in Hungary provides for sweeping executive powers in the event of a declared emergency including the banning of public assemblies, severe restrictions on freedom of movement and the freezing of assets. Vaguely defined provisions grant powers to suspend laws and fast-track new ones and deploy the army with live firearms to quell disturbances.

In France a state of emergency has been renewed five times standardizing a range of intrusive measures, including powers to ban demonstrations and conduct searches without judicial warrants.

Temporary emergency measures, such as administrative orders controlling movement in the UK and France, have increasingly become embedded in ordinary law.

Poland’s new counter-terrorism law permanently cements draconian powers – which include discriminatory targeting of foreign nationals.