Evidence

The Independent Reviewer gives evidence, almost invariably in public, to a variety of UK parliamentary committees; and submits responses to consultations, and publishes notes, on matters that are under consideration.

I consider this a very important way of informing the policy and political debate on counter-terrorism and civil liberties, second only to the preparation of my reports.

New draft Video Recording Code of Practice, Northern Ireland: my response to consultation

On 22 July 2019 the Northern Ireland Office opened a consultation on a new draft Code of Practice for the video recording of interviews of persons detained under section 41 of, or Schedule 7 to, the Terrorism Act 2000 at police stations in Northern Ireland. Section 41 contains the power to arrest suspected terrorists. Schedule 7 contains the power to examine travellers at ports and borders. The consultation closes on 14 October 2019.

The consultation document and new draft Code of Practice is here.

190827 formal response to NI Recording Code

 

New draft Schedule 7 Code of Practice: my response to consultation

In February 2019 the Home Office opened a consultation on a new draft Code of Practice under Schedule 7 Terrorism Act 2000. This is the power to examine travellers at ports and borders. The consultation closed on 5 April 2019.

The consultation document is here:

The new draft Code which should be read with my response is here:

190904 formal response to Sched7 Code

Submission in relation to Clause 3 of the Counter Terrorism & Border Security Bill 2018

COUNTER TERRORISM AND BORDER SECURITY BILL:  SUBMISSION IN RELATION TO CLAUSE 3

BY MAX HILL QC AND PROFESSOR CLIVE WALKER

This paper follows evidence given to the Bill Scrutiny Committee on 26th June 2018 by Max Hill QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation. Together with Professor Clive Walker QC (Hon), Senior Special Adviser to the Independent Reviewer,  the premise of this paper is to ask the question, if a new variant of section 58 is needed at all, what might that look like ?[1]

[1] This paper should be read in conjunction with the analysis already given in Professor Walker’s written submission to the Joint Committee on Human Rights.