Counterterrorism laws and state repression in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks

Abstract

ABSTRACT The relationship between terrorism and human rights has attracted considerable research and policy attention. As countries grapple with formulating effective strategies to combat terrorist groups, governments have faced criticism for resorting to increased repression in the name of counterterrorism. One common response by states to terrorism has been the implementation of counterterrorism legislation, with numerous countries enacting such laws in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks to establish a legal framework for addressing the terrorist threat. In this paper, we delve into the impact of counterterrorism legislation on abuses by the state, with a specific focus on the use of torture and political imprisonment. We argue that the introduction of counterterrorism legislation has exposed more citizens to the threat of being detained and the risk of torture by state forces. We contend that this relationship is particularly pronounced in countries adopting new counterterrorism legislation after 9/11. To substantiate our argument, we utilise data on counterterrorism legislation and conduct empirical testing, uncovering some supportive evidence for the relationship between the introduction of counterterrorism legislation and the prevalence of torture and political imprisonment, especially in cases where new laws were introduced in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.