Context Of Counter-terrorism Research Articles

DUE PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT OF COUNTER-TERRORISM “A CASE STUDY FROM IRAQ”

This article provides a critical assessment of the current Iraqi criminal justice process, in counter-terrorism context to give an answer to the question of whether the approach of Iraqi legislator in criminal proceedings meets requirements of security in confrontation against terrorist and international law of human rights. The paper reveals that, there are many welcome procedures on the safeguard of rights and liberties to strike a right balance between providing due process and securing security of citizens while fighting terrorism. However, the problem is the difficulties faced by the state in its endeavor to secure national security against one of the most serious terrorist crimes. What follow is that it may be difficult for security authorities during dealing with these crimes to cope with or realize the wide standards of procedural safeguards and human rights for persons whom may be subjected to criminal investigations. This paper proposes that it may be well to enact new legal provisions or special Act that can expressly provide police with wide-ranging powers so as to arrive the correct strategy in the criminal confrontation against terrorism in the light of international standards. The study adopts qualitative research methods of a doctrinal nature by the analytical method of texts and legal regulations as well as the comparative method is useful to have some lessons from different attitudes by comparing the different legislations of some countries in dealing with the subject.

Towards a Decolonial Approach to New Zealand’s Counter Terrorism: Afrocentric Perspectives

New Zealand’s counterterrorism approach, like that of many other postcolonial states, stems from models which continue to operationalise and legitimise colonial continuities. These models are predominantly underpinned by the events of 9/11. However, the devastating attacks in Christchurch in 2019 raised concerns about the way domestic terrorism has been conceived of by the security and intelligence communities in New Zealand. Debates have emerged on the efficacy of the Western-centric Global War on Terror (GWOT) narrative on terrorism and how it fits within the realities of New Zealand’s counter-terrorism context, given the country’s national peculiarities and colonial history. Consequently, this article explores the GWOT ideology and attempts to expose terrorism as an a historical colonial concept. The argument is thus made for epistemic reconstitution and pluriversality of knowledges in how terrorism is understood and dealt with in the New Zealand context. In so doing, the article invokes decolonial thinking by drawing parallels between New Zealand’s experience and the African colonial experience, by discussing decolonisation through the lens of Afrocentrism. Animating New Zealand’s counterterrorism experience through the prism of Afrocentrism, therefore, the argument is made that the foundation of knowledge production in counter-terrorism within New Zealand is profoundly colonial.

Counter Terrorism: Intelligence and the Fire Service

While many would recognise and acknowledge the role fire services play in the response to terrorist attacks, few realise the role fire services can play within an intelligence context of counter-terrorism. As both consumers and producers of intelligence fire services can inform and prepare agencies and communities for the preparation, response, and recovery from terrorist events. In the years following 11 September 2001, some agencies within the United States and the United Kingdom have improved relationships and information sharing amongst counter-terrorism agencies and the fire service. These improved relationships and enhanced information-sharing pathways lead to improved preparedness and situational awareness. Firefighters can support counter-terrorism intelligence efforts by providing expert advice on topics such as hazardous materials and disaster response, reporting suspicious activity observed during their daily community interactions, and by providing intelligence agencies an additional viewpoint which may help them to interpret the information they are assessing.

Rethinking direct participation in hostilities and continuous combat function in light of targeting members of terrorist non-State armed groups

AbstractEndless armed conflicts against terrorist groups put civilian populations at risk. Since France has been involved in the Sahel from 2013 onwards, transnational non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) of extended geographical and temporal scope against groups designated as terrorists are not a US exception anymore. NIACs against terrorist groups, conducted not only by the United States but also by France, persist and have been reconfigured around threat anticipation. How can anticipatory warfare be best constrained? This article argues that it can be best done through more constraining rules regulating target selection in NIACs and, in particular, by redefining the notion of continuous combat function (CCF). Many elements explored in this article indicate that the United States and France select targets that they pre-designate as terrorists, before these targets are engaged in hostilities. Instead of responding to the observed participation of these individuals in hostilities, strikes are based on contextual and behavioural elements ahead or outside of such moments. This paper argues that when war consists of threat anticipation, it becomes very extensive and particularly risky for civilians. Furthermore, recent State practice in the counterterrorism context reveals the pitfalls of the notions of direct participation in hostilities and CCF as defined in the 2009 International Committee of the Red Cross Interpretive Guidance. Outside this context, the interpretations proposed in the Interpretive Guidance might seem sufficient to constrain target selection processes and to protect civilian populations. However, when applied to armed conflicts that are driven by threat anticipation, the pitfalls of these interpretations emerge. I formulate a critique of these interpretations as being partly responsible for anticipatory warfare and propose an alternative theory for the CCF test.

Strategic exclusion, co-option and containment: towards an integrative theory of state-CSOs relations

ABSTRACT Although there have been attempts to theorise state-Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) relations in the Counter-Terrorism (CT) context, including the “co-option and containment” and “duality of coercion” perspectives, these two-way articulations have failed to account for the range of strategic options open to the state in regulating CSOs. This study presents the framework of Strategic Exclusion, Co-option and Containment (SECC) to underscore the general patterns of state engagement of CSOs in the context of CT. It mapped secondary evidence in 19 countries and used three illustrative case studies (Australia, Uganda and Russia) to examine the elements of SECC, namely, states’ exclusion of CSOs in law and policymaking on CT, the use of strategic ambiguity in enacting and interpreting CT laws, delegitimizing or criminalising advocacy and influencing the transformation of CSOs into state adjutants. This pattern of engagement with CSOs is transforming voluntary and associational life in precarious ways. The article advances the Copenhagen School and rational-actor model of global strategic decision-making, and contributes to discourses on the closing of civic spaces, democratic recession and the resurgence of authoritarianism. It lays a foundation for generalisable theory and future empirical research on state behaviour towards CSOs in the context of violence, conflict, and security.

Resilience against counterterrorism?

This article examines how repression is being wielded by the Russian Federation in Crimea against Muslim Tatar communities under the guise of countering terrorism and violent extremism, and how non-violent resistance and grassroots resilience is being fostered as a means of countering securitisation. The case demonstrates how language developed within a Western security context are co-opted by authoritarian actors, how Islamic activist groups engage in activities that can be framed as ‘resilience-building’ through the language of human rights, freedom of press and democracy, and the issues raised by applying the term ‘resilience’ within a counterterrorism context—both in illiberal and liberal settings. The article finds that techniques comparable to concepts of resilience-building are being conducted in an illiberal setting by communities in response to, and as a counter against highly repressive articulations of counterterrorism. It also suggests that the term ‘resilience’ is problematic in this context, failing to adequately account for—and often actively obscuring—organisational activism of communities and their interaction with the political context. This offers an understanding of community-led responses against counterterrorism and counter-extremism as a tool of repression as well as examining the credibility of terms such as ‘resilience’ within CVE in Crimea and elsewhere.

Investigating the intersections between counter-terrorism and NGOs in Nigeria: development practice in conflict-affected areas

ABSTRACT This article examines the factors that influence the Nigerian government’s constraints of NGOs in counter-terrorism context, analysing whether NGO type, nature, areas of operation and size were determinant factors. Drawing from mixed-methods design, it argues that NGOs’ political advocacy, reporting of human rights abuses and monitoring the use of security funds were key factors that attract government restrictions. Women, youth, children, and faith-based NGOs experienced more government constraints than human rights NGOs. Advocacy and international NGOs also suffered more restrictions. The findings contribute to generalisable knowledge by demonstrating the link between counter-terrorism and NGOs in Nigeria.

Has The ‘War on Terror’ Put Due Process on the Stand?


 
 
 The European Court of Justice (ECJ) struck a balance between due process rights and national security in the Kadi II case. Applying the ECJ’s analysis to a case recently decided by the D.C. District Court – the Zaidan case – illustrates that a more rights-protective approach can be attained in US courts too. First, this article will explore due process in Europe via the four different versions of the Kadi case. Then, it will take an in-depth look at the Zaidan case. The article concludes by arguing that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals should adopt a stance on due process similar to that taken by the ECJ in the Kadi II case – which served to uphold the rule of law in Europe by making the actions of public officials reviewable before EU courts in the counter-terrorism context. By exercising a more ‘muscular’ attitude towards the other branches of government’s counter-terrorism measures, the US judiciary might use this case to start a new line of precedent distinct from prior US cases with respect to US citizens’ constitutional rights in the post 9/11 counter-terrorism paradigm.
 
 

CTS and normativity: the essentials of preemptive counter-terrorism interventions

ABSTRACTThis article critically assesses calls for “normativity” in counter-radicalisation and counter-extremism, and suggests that aligning with hegemonic narratives about securing the “pre-crime” space is problematic in a context of emancipation. Utilising interviews with a number of Prevent officials (including Channel “de-radicalisation” mentors), the article argues that when any counter-radicalisation regime is implemented, two traits are necessarily inherent: identity construction, and “concerned concern”, both of which are based on subjective speculation about an individual’s future intent. Identity construction in preemptive counter-terrorism works through prejudiced human imagination in order to normalise perceived and “risky” divergence, but which is mired in contradictions precisely because practitioners interpret risk (and therefore divergence) differently. Concerned concern is a paradoxical constitution both of support for and protection against individuals. Ultimately, in exploring these two concepts, the article critically engages with the notion that Prevent is “just another safeguarding duty”. Building on earlier critical terrorism scholarship, this discussion shows how worst-case logics apparent in national discourse are largely absent at the point of implementation, yet pejorative identity-construction and some suspicion (no matter how banalised) are implicit in any risk-managing scheme in a counter-terrorism context. These qualities are incompatible with an emancipatory agenda.

Defining International Terrorism to Protect Human Rights in the Context of Counter-terrorism

The main argument of this article is that defining international terrorism will further the protection of human rights in the context of counter-terrorism. For this purpose, it will be shown that the transnational legal system under which counter-terrorism operates is fraught with problems regarding human rights protection. Secondly, it will be shown how domestic counter-terrorism legislation can become a breeding ground for serious human rights violations, when based on too broad or otherwise problematic definitions of terrorism. Finally, it will be explored how human rights protection has been addressed so far by the relevant bodies of the United Nations and to what extent, if finalised, an internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism in the framework of the UN Comprehensive Convention will contribute to a fuller enjoyment of rights in a counterterrorism context.

Do Counter-Terrorism Measures Work? Appraising the Long-Term and Global Effectiveness of Security Policies

In the counter-terrorism context, significant restrictions of liberties are often politically justified on the ground that they are necessary to ensure security. Yet, in practice, governments very rarely support this claim with studies evaluating the actual effects of counter-terrorism measures on security. Effectiveness is a key issue for counter-terrorism because measures that are not effective cannot be politically justified as necessary. In turn, restrictions to human rights that are not necessary cannot be legally justified. This Policy Brief discusses the main debates and challenges surrounding the issue of effectiveness of counter-terrorism laws and policies by addressing three main questions: what effectiveness means, why it should be evaluated, and how it could be done. In conclusion, it invites policymakers to take a step back and to genuinely engage with the question of effectiveness of security policies.

Giving voice to the voiceless: vulnerable refugees in Lebanon

ABSTRACTSeven years on, Syria’s Arab Spring has mutated into a civil war marked by attacks by President Assad against civilian communities, interventions by foreign powers and the rise of the so-called Islamic State, Nusra Front and numerous other terrorist organisations. This research report focusses on Mar Elias camp, the smallest Palestinian refugee camp in the heart of Beirut, now inhabited by a large number of refugees from Syria. The aim is to record the voices and concerns of refugees from Syria. Through doing so, it looks beyond a narrow focus on radicalisation and terrorism recruitment within the camp. Instead, the refugee’s needs, and the human security and protection challenges they are faced with are outlined. This study adopts a participatory approach involving direct interviews with Syrian refugees in every stage of the research process. The research focuses on the perceptions, lived experiences and expectations of Syrian refugees, and the Palestinian refugees from Syria (PRS) population. The aim is to grant a voice to the voiceless, record their own narratives, and to offer them the opportunity to report on the security challenges that confront them. The research is an outcome of nine months of humanitarian fieldwork in the Mar Elias camp as a community development project officer on the project ‘Urban Neighbourhoods Mobilised to Respond to WASH (water, hygiene and sanitation), Shelter and Protection Needs.’ Information was gathered during focus group discussions, needs assessments and one-on-one interviews. The participatory research is significant since it allows people to be actively involved in defining their priorities and seeking solutions and facilitates the study of perceptions, and caters for marginalised and vulnerable groups. It is hoped to show how through participatory research, marginalised people can raise their concerns and have their voices heard in order to allow for more accurate information about the communities involved, and to question assumptions such as those that prioritise framing security within the camps in the narrow context of counter terrorism.

Sociomateriality of Digital Technologies in Collaborative Decision-Making Counter-Terrorism Contexts

The notion of sociomateriality is deeply rooted in attempts to understand the ontological nature and role of digital technologies (ICTs) in human systems. Prior research, particularly in the Information Systems (IS) discipline, recognizes the relational perspective of such efforts. From a meta-synthesis of literature and the application of Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), this study sought to explicate the sociomaterial nature of digital technologies in collaborative decision-making within the context of counter-terrorism as a ‘wicked’ problem. Throughout the meta-synthesis, what comes to the fore is the perfunctory engagement of computing disciplines with digital technologies as a critical artifact in structuring of the CDM problem in ‘wicked’ contexts. However, insight from further analysis pinpoint discourses reifying the relational ontology of digital technologies in human systems, which are firmly entrenched in various disciplines. The resurgent interest in the sociomateriality of digital technologies is compelling and likely to provide a “new theatre”, providing both scholars and practitioners the opportunity to better structure digitally-enabled complex and wicked situations. Three insights were plausible from the meta-synthesis. First, from a methodological perspective, soft Operations Research (OR) approaches such as SSM can undergird structuring of wicked problems such as CDM within counter-terrorism contexts. The second insight directly calls for theorizing the sociomaterial nature of IS-related ‘wicked’ problems by considering the affordances of digital technologies. In the case of CDM, democratizing affordances of digital technologies are fundamental in exposing the extant power structures in collaborative networks. The third inference elevates the metaphor of mutual coupling of digital technologies with other multi-actors in CDM. While these propositions are tentative due to the limits of a meta-synthesis approach, they provide a foundation to inform further inquiry for legitimizing sociomateriality of digital technology in the practice of CDM within ‘wicked’ counter-terrorism contexts.

'United Kingdom' in Kfir, I., Patel, S., and Batt, M. (Eds), Counterterrorism Yearbook 2018 (Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Canberra, 2018) 141-149

The paper considers 'Counterterrorism in the United Kingdom' with reference to events in 2017. While exit from Europe dominated British politics during 2017, the UK’s terrorism landscape grew closer to that of continental Europe because of several mass-casualty terrorist attacks that were very similar to earlier events in France and Germany. However, if 2017 was the ‘Year of Steel’ (reflecting the weaponisation of vehicles and kitchen knives), it was also a year of steely resolve in the response to terrorism. There were no dramatic declarations of emergency, emergency legislation, round-ups of suspects or closed borders. In consequence, there were more continuities than discontinuities in the counterterrorism (CT) context and background in 2017. The main threat remained international Islamist terrorism. The threat level became Critical (an attack is imminent) for a few days after the Manchester attack in May 2017 and again in the aftermath of an attempted bombing on a tube train at Parson’s Green in September. Otherwise, the level has remained at Severe (an attack is highly likely) since August 2014. Despite the shocks of 2017, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson declared that Islamist terrorism isn’t ‘an existential threat’. Even more constant is the threat of Northern Ireland (mainly dissident Republican) terrorism (Severe in Northern Ireland and Substantial—attack being a strong possibility—in Britain, which are unchanged since they were first published in 2010). Outside Northern Ireland, any nexus with organised crime remains tenuous. CT policy and legislation also remained steady in 2017.

Police community engagement and outreach in a counterterrorism context

ABSTRACTPolice engagement of Muslim communities to prevent terrorism is fraught with tension. This paper presents results from in-depth interviews with members of the Australian Federal Police Community Liaison Team (CLT) to understand the practice of community engagement and the tactical and strategic considerations that are required when police engage Muslim communities. The interview data illustrate the different attributes of trust judged as essential to effective engagement by CLT members, with displays of integrity regarded as important. Data demonstrate how Australian Federal Police liaison officers navigate the fine line between intelligence gathering and community engagement, with the provision of intelligence seen as an outcome rather than an aim of effective outreach. Strategies to manage the community impact from counterterrorism arrests are explored, with the interview data indicating that forms of outreach have some inherent limitations due to the contingencies surrounding counterterrorism operations. The uncertainties and risks of engaging some hard to reach groups, such as Muslim youth are highlighted. Evidence of the outputs and outcomes of engagement efforts are illustrated, with the willingness of Muslims to voluntarily approach members of the CLT regarded as an important outcome. Broader lessons for counterterrorism community engagement are highlighted.

Politics of Conviviality? State–Civil Society Relations Within the Context of Counter-Terrorism in Nigeria

There are emergent interests on the dynamics of counter-terrorism measures (CTMs) at global, regional and national levels, particularly with respect to how CTMs intersect with and shape state–civil society relations. Using a descriptive research design, this study examines how the implementation of CTMs influences the dynamics of state–civil society relations in Nigeria. The stratified random sampling was used to select 205 programme officers of civil society organizations (CSOs), while purposive sampling was used to select 29 executive directors of CSOs for in-depth interviews. The descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyse the data. The findings show that the capacity of CSOs to contribute to CTM is shaped by the politics that places CSOs in the service of the government. Their positioning helps establish an environment of conviviality in which CSOs advance the interest of the state in the context of counter-terrorism, and in turn, the state engages and endorses CSOs. The paper argues that CTMs are increasingly impinging on the operations of CSOs in Nigeria, thus constraining the autonomous space that defines CSOs that lie at the intersection of state and society.

Administrative Measures in Counter-terrorism and the Protection of Human Rights

This article analyses the increasing use of administrative measures, such as travel bans and control orders, in the counter-terrorism context. On the basis of a review of the use of these measures in three selected states (the United Kingdom, France, and the Netherlands), the paper provides a critical assessment of the use of administrative measures in counter-terrorism. It identifies situations in which the use of administrative measures might be justified, and assesses the impact of the use of these measures on the protection of human rights. In conclusion, the paper recommends that limits and safeguards be established around the use of administrative measures in counter-terrorism.

Administrative Measures against Foreign Fighters: In Search of Limits and Safeguards

By Dr. Bérénice Boutin. This Research Paper analyses the increasing use of administrative measures, such as travel bans and control orders, in the counter-terrorism context. On the basis of a review of the use of these measures in three selected states (the United Kingdom, France, and the Netherlands), the paper provides a critical assessment of the […]

Terrorism and Trial by Jury in Russia

The re-adoption of trial by jury by post-Soviet Russia in 1993 was heralded as a significant break with the discredited legal system of a crumbling regime. In less than twenty years the jury in Russian criminal trials has undergone a significant retrenchment. That process is particularly stark in the field of counterterrorism. This article will examine the history of trial by jury in Russia. It will detail the constitutional and legislative provisions adopted in the 1990s and will then examine the legal framework and political context, which gave rise to the rolling back of the jury in the counterterrorism context. Abandoning jury trial in the face of an ongoing terrorism threat was, perhaps, unsurprising. However, the authors will argue that this is in fact part of a wider unease with the very notions, which underpin the jury as an institution. Conditions for trial by jury appeared fertile but this was not the case: the Russian jury has shallow roots.

Multi-National Counter-Terrorism Expert Network: UN Reform, the Rule of Law, and Counter-Terrorism: How Can Past Lessons Inform Future Responses?

The current reform agenda and identified priorities of the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General present a timely and important opportunity to reassess, strengthen, and develop the UN’s pivotal role in inter alia counter-terrorist responses. In particular, it is essential that this agenda is not limited solely or principally to institutional and procedural aspects of the UN’s architecture, but rather that equal focus is given to its substantive elements. Both are important and inherently related -- measures to strengthen one limb will not achieve their full potential and reach without corresponding and parallel efforts being afforded to the other. Drawing upon the recent findings and recommendations of a 3 year multi-national and multi-disciplinary project which examined what the rule of law means in the specific context of counter-terrorism, this report has sought to continue the process of more clearly identifying and specifying particular elements of the substantive rule of law framework within which counter-terrorist responses should occur, and which it is believed should form an important part of this reform process. A recurring theme throughout is the critical and increased role that the UN could play here -- in particular the General Assembly and Security Council -- to bring greater coherence, clarity, and certainty to the counter-terrorist responses of both states and international organizations, in particular in terms of standard setting and norm development. First, it has sought to more clearly define the parameters and related norms of the international rule of law framework, not least in the absence of universal agreement regarding the exact meaning of the concept of the rule of law. The correct starting point is believed to be the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy 2006, which benefits from universal consensus as a UN General Assembly resolution, at least in theory if not always in practice. This identifies obligations under the UN Charter, international human rights, humanitarian, refugee, and criminal law as important elements of the applicable framework. The underpinning principles, though, are believed to be much wider, incorporating other principles such as those of legality, necessity, proportionality, equality, non-discrimination, democracy, due process, state and institutional responsibility for wrongful acts, and due diligence. Second, it has sought to add substantive meaning to the concept of prevention which underpins important aspects of the UN Secretary-General’s identified priorities yet is without definition or articulated substantive parameters. Through considering recent examples of practices that states and the UN have sought to bring under the umbrella of prevention -- ranging from UN imposed sanctions, to reliance upon anti-terrorist legislation, administrative detention, military courts and commissions, questionable interrogation methods, targeted killing, and expulsions -- related rule of law constraints and concerns have been identified. In doing so, it is hoped that these might further inform and encourage the UN -- not least the law-making activities of the General Assembly in relation to counter-terrorist matters of pressing rule of law concern -- in establishing clearer parameters and identifying related norms for prevention and preventive responses, in particular when the line is crossed from legality to illegality, and what the international community considers to be legitimate and illegitimate. The final key area considered were trends at the national, regional, and international levels towards increasing the accountability of and reducing existing impunity gaps for not only non-state terrorist actors, but also states and institutional actors in their counter-terrorist responses, to ensure appropriate criminal and civil avenues of justice and reparation for their respective victims. These include both judicial and non-judicial mechanisms, not least due to the inherent limitations of both. With respect to the courts, whilst they remain pragmatic regarding the difficulties facing states in meeting security imperatives, especially by affording them a significant degree of discretion in determining when a public state of emergency exists, nevertheless they remain resolute that states must act in accordance with their rule of law obligations regardless of the severity of the threat. Non-judicial mechanisms play an important part also, such as parliamentary oversight; human rights bodies and experts; and the Office of Ombudsperson to the Security Council’s 1267 sanctions regime, although concerns remain here also, including in terms of determining and affording acceptable standards of due process in administrative proceedings. Furthermore, a significant rule of law limitation of both judicial and non-judicial mechanisms remains overcoming some of the practical obstacles, such as the challenge of obtaining adequate levels of disclosure by executives of security sensitive materials. There are a number of ways in which the UN could inform and improve these processes, not only at the rhetorical level, but also through the development of soft law and hard law including treaty making.