Counter-terrorism Law Research Articles

The shrinking space for civil society activism in Palestine

Counter-terrorism is increasingly being used to shrink the space for civil society. In October 2021, six Palestinian civil society organisations (CSOs) were proscribed by the Israeli Minister of Defense as ‘terrorist organisations’ based on the 2016 Counter-Terrorism Law. If fully implemented, in conjunction with the 1945 Defense (Emergency) Regulations, the CSOs’ offices would be closed and their staff arrested. However, the designation’s primary audience has reportedly been the donors of these organisations. This article explores whether the designation added another layer to the long-ongoing process of criminalising the CSOs, curtailing their capabilities to operate, and delegitimising them as partners for the donors and global civil society. The analysis draws on a combination of the shrinking space concept and securitisation theory. It broadens the latter to include the power of the referent subject, an aspect often neglected in the literature. Even though both audiences did not approve of the Israeli government’s securitising move and the CSOs were able to develop coping mechanisms, it deepened chilling effects. Continued attacks against the organisations contributed to further limiting their activism space. The case study builds upon a content analysis of legal documents, public statements, and data gathered through semi-structured interviews.

Politicizing terror: the (ab)use of counterterrorism law for authoritarian ends in Tunisia

ABSTRACT This article analyses Tunisian President Kais Saied's abuse of counterterrorism law and his culpability in the country’s democratic backsliding. Following his election in 2019, Saied, with a split government and a growing economic and political crisis, took extreme measures to end the political deadlock, including dissolving the country’s parliament and claiming emergency powers in 2021. We argue that Saied has moved beyond making temporary moves to ensure political stability and is now seeking to use the country’s counterterrorism law as both his “weapon and shield,” conducting a targeted arrest campaign against opposition figures, and solidifying his authoritarian control of Tunisia. The arrest campaign, conducted primarily under the 2015 counterterrorism law, commenced in early 2023 and has included several prominent political figures in Tunisia. The charges, often stemming from an offender’s political statements, were framed as violations of the counterterrorism law, and were therefore justified to stem the tide of extremism and terrorism in Tunisia. Such legal abuse has allowed Saied to present his authoritarian actions as within the limits of the rule of law, a common approach for entrenched authoritarians. The analysis of arrest patterns suggests that a continued abuse of the counterterrorism law will eventually erode Tunisia’s nascent democracy.

Effects of trust in government, counterterrorism policies, and counterterrorism laws on fear of cyberterrorism and fear of terrorism

ABSTRACT This study investigates the effects of trust in government, relational trust, counterterrorism policies, and counterterrorism laws on fear of cyberterrorism and fear of terrorism. The data were collected from randomly selected college students at a university in the United States (N = 353). The results of path analyses using structural equation modeling for both unmediated and mediated models indicated that trust in government was the only factor significantly reducing fear of both terrorism and cyberterrorism. Additionally, trust in government mediated the effects of relational trust, counterterrorism laws, and counterterrorism policies on fear of both terrorism and cyberterrorism. Furthermore, respondents were more fearful of cyberterrorism than terrorism. The results and limitations are discussed.

SCO's Cyber Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Cooperation: Current Status, Challenges, and Countermeasures

SCO's Cyber Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Cooperation: Current Status, Challenges, and Countermeasures

The Tightrope of Individual Liberties amid Pakistan’s Counter-Terrorism Agenda

This doctrinal research article explores the nuances, pitfalls, and opportunities within this intricate landscape. This doctrinal research delves into the intricate balance between individual liberties and Pakistan's counter-terrorism agenda, navigating the complex terrain where security imperatives intersect with fundamental rights. As Pakistan grapples with persistent security threats from terrorism, its response has often entailed the implementation of stringent measures aimed at thwarting terrorist activities and ensuring public safety. However, these measures have raised concerns about their impact on civil liberties, including freedoms of expression, association, and privacy. Drawing upon legal frameworks, policy documents, and judicial precedents, this research critically examines the evolving landscape of counter-terrorism laws and practices in Pakistan and their implications for individual liberties. It scrutinizes the compatibility of counter-terrorism measures with constitutional guarantees and international human rights standards, assessing the extent to which security imperatives have encroached upon fundamental rights and freedoms. Furthermore, this research explores the role of judicial oversight, executive discretion, and legislative reforms in reconciling the tension between security concerns and individual liberties within Pakistan's legal framework. It analyses landmark court decisions, legislative enactments, and government policies to elucidate the legal and institutional mechanisms aimed at safeguarding individual liberties while countering terrorism effectively. Moreover, this research situates Pakistan's counter-terrorism efforts within the broader context of regional security dynamics, highlighting the interconnectedness of domestic security challenges with regional conflicts, geopolitical rivalries, and transnational terrorist networks. It underscores the importance of regional cooperation, information sharing, and diplomatic engagement in addressing common security threats while respecting individual liberties across borders. By critically examining the tightrope walk between individual liberties and Pakistan's counter-terrorism agenda, this research contributes to a nuanced understanding of the challenges and trade-offs inherent in balancing security imperatives with respect for fundamental rights.

Iraq's Counterterrorism Laws Under Scrutiny Unjustified Asset Freezes

In response to the terrorist threat posed by ISIS, Iraq implemented legal frameworks aimed at disrupting terrorist financing, including the establishment of a committee to freeze terrorist assets as per international and national laws. This study assesses the effectiveness of these measures through qualitative analysis of legal documents and judicial reviews by the Federal Supreme Court, which found many asset freezes to be unjustified. The findings indicate a need for procedural refinement to ensure fair and effective enforcement, highlighting the challenges of balancing legal integrity with counterterrorism efforts in Iraq. Highlights: Effectiveness: Examines the effectiveness of Iraq's asset freezing against terrorism, identifying practical issues. Judicial Oversight: Highlights the Federal Supreme Court's role in overturning unjustified asset freezes. Legal Refinement: Emphasizes the need to refine procedures to ensure fairness and compliance with international standards. Keywords: Terrorism Financing, Legal Frameworks, Asset Freezing, Judicial Review, Counterterrorism

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

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.

Counterterrorism, political anxiety and legitimacy in postcolonial India and Egypt

ABSTRACT The post 9/11 global proliferation of counterterrorism legislation is increasingly being interpreted as part of a longer story of colonialism. Scholars have shown how expansive counterterrorism can be interpreted not merely as an exceptional state of violence in situations where the rule of law and guarantees of ordinary civil liberties are suspended, but as a form of law-making that draws upon colonial logics and frameworks of governance. However, a major lacuna in this scholarship is the lack of attention to counterterrorism laws in postcolonial states and their negotiations with colonial logics of law-making. This article makes a postcolonial contribution to Critical Terrorism Studies and International Politics by showing how colonial logics of counterterrorism are repurposed by postcolonial states in comparable ways. By comparing counterterror laws in two postcolonial states, India and Egypt, this article shows how colonial logics intersect with nationalist ideologies, postcolonial anxieties, as well as an attempt by postcolonial states to seek international legitimacy post 9/11 vis-a-vis the War on Terror. In both states, counterterror laws are weaponised to target civil society activists, journalists, and religious, ethnic and other minorities in comparable ways. This article, therefore, challenges the centrality of 9/11 and state of exception/emergency in the framing of counterterror laws. In so doing, it advances knowledge of counterterrorism vis-à-vis postcolonial engagements with colonial epistemes and “normal” practices of security.

‘State threats’, security, and democracy: the National Security Act 2023

AbstractThe National Security Act 2023 replaces the Official Secrets Acts 1911, 1920 and 1939, updating, rationalising, and expanding the various offences which they contained and introducing new rules aimed at the same broad end of countering the threat posed to the UK by the efforts of hostile states and their proxies. It therefore represents a legislative confirmation of the ongoing pivot back to ‘state threats’ rather than terrorism as the focus of the national security enterprise in the UK, though now informed by the experience of counter-terrorism law since 2000. This paper assesses the main changes made by the 2023 Act, including in the context of threats to the democratic process, actual and potential, which have been identified in recent years. The argument offered is that the focus of the 2023 Act – encompassing threats to democracy only where they rise to the level of threats to national security – is undermined by the absence of a more thoroughgoing project to protect the democratic process more generally against foreign interference.

Old Rules to Fix New Problems: Counterterrorism, Refugees and Withdrawal of Nationality

Abstract The international legal regimes for refugees and for statelessness have much in common. Both aim at mitigating an absence of State protection of individual rights, while the treaties central to each are related in substance, structure and seek to balance similar concerns. Another similarity is more recent: both face challenges amidst new concerns and new law in the area of counterterrorism. The last two decades have seen a sharp increase in international rules on counterterrorism, the impact of which can also be seen in immigration law and administrative powers. That impact is conditioned by how ‘terrorism’ itself is defined, and Section 2 of this article will highlight some consequences of domestic approaches and why the capacity of international law to impose limits on domestic definitions is often overstated. Section 3 will consider the interaction between counterterrorism law and refugee law, arguing that current difficulties arise not from the substance of the rules but from practical, resource-based challenges. Section 4 will consider legal and practical questions raised by recent practice in withdrawing nationality due to suspected involvement in terrorism, a measure applied to both dual nationals and to those at risk of statelessness. This article will argue that the new threats and responses thereto do pose important practical challenges requiring further attention and resources. But that does not mean that new substantive law is required: the ‘old rules’ adequately balance security concerns with the protection of individual rights, and are more than adequate to meet contemporary challenges.

JUXTAPOSITION OF RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION AND TERRORISM UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

The right to self-determination is one of the jus cogens law under the international law which denotes the legal right of people to decide their political, economic and social affairs within their borders of a territory. The right essentially gives a license for the people to use force legally in exercising their right to self-determination. However, with the absence of a universally accepted definition on the term terrorism, an issue has been raised on designing National Liberation Movement as terrorist. Therefore, this study is conducted to examine how designing National Liberation Movement as terrorist impacted the exercising of the right to self-determination. The study analyses relevant legal laws and jurist opinions on the issues at hand using a library-based methodology. The result of this study reveals that despite provision for countering international terrorism, the current counterterrorism law is influenced by States municipal law. With a liberal power to define, states have been recorded to design National Liberation Movement as terrorist group to allow them to used municipal law against National Liberation Movement. In short, whilst use of force in exercising the right to self-determination is govern under the international humanitarian law, the lack of universally accepted definition of terrorism caused National Liberation Movement to be designated as terrorist, thus criminalising the liberation movement of the whole group.

Balancing Security and Liberty: Examining Contemporary Counterterrorism Laws

This paper delves into the intricate challenge of striking a delicate balance between national security imperatives and the protection of individual liberties in the context of contemporary counterterrorism laws. In the aftermath of global terrorist threats, governments worldwide have enacted a myriad of legislative measures aimed at preventing and combating acts of terrorism. However, the implementation of these measures often raises concerns about potential encroachments on civil liberties, privacy rights, and due process. The study critically examines the evolving landscape of counterterrorism laws, analyzing key legal frameworks and their impact on individual freedoms. It scrutinizes the delicate equilibrium required to effectively address security threats without sacrificing the fundamental rights and values that underpin democratic societies. Drawing on case studies from diverse jurisdictions, the research explores the implications of counterterrorism measures on marginalized communities, surveillance practices, and the rule of law. Furthermore, the paper assesses the effectiveness of oversight mechanisms and judicial review processes in mitigating the risks of abuse and overreach. It considers the role of technology, international cooperation, and intelligence sharing in contemporary counterterrorism efforts and evaluates their potential impact on individual privacy and human rights. In addition, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on counterterrorism policy by offering insights into the challenges of balancing security imperatives with the preservation of civil liberties. It advocates for a thoughtful and nuanced approach that fosters security without compromising the core values that define democratic societies.

Legislative Responses to Terrorism: A Critical Review of Counterterrorism Measures

In the face of escalating global terrorism threats, nations worldwide have grappled with the imperative to enact and amend legislation aimed at preventing, detecting, and prosecuting acts of terrorism. This paper conducts a comprehensive and critical examination of legislative responses to terrorism, with a focus on their efficacy, implications for civil liberties, and broader societal impacts. The research begins by analysing the evolution of counterterrorism laws across diverse jurisdictions, emphasizing the shifting landscape of security concerns and the subsequent legal adjustments. It scrutinizes the core features of these legislative measures, including preventive detention, surveillance, intelligence gathering, and the definition of terrorism offenses. A critical analysis is employed to assess the balance between security imperatives and the protection of individual liberties, scrutinizing the potential for abuse, discrimination, and erosion of due process. Case studies from various countries illuminate the real-world consequences of counterterrorism legislation, shedding light on the impact on marginalized communities, legal frameworks, and international human rights standards. The paper also explores the effectiveness of oversight mechanisms, judicial review, and safeguards incorporated within these legislative frameworks to curb potential abuses and protect against overreach. Furthermore, the study considers the role of technology, intelligence-sharing agreements, and international cooperation in shaping legislative responses to terrorism. It aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the challenges and successes in addressing the complex interplay between security concerns and the preservation of fundamental rights. This critical review seeks to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on counterterrorism policy by offering insights into the multifaceted implications of legislative responses. The paper concludes with recommendations for fostering a balanced approach that upholds both security imperatives and the foundational principles of democracy.

Matters of care or matters of security: feminist reflections on prosecuting terrorism financing

ABSTRACT International treaties and European directives have put new legal responsibilities on EU member states to pre-emptively monitor and prosecute terrorist activities and offences. In particular, the prosecution of terrorism financing has been an important focus to prevent material and ideological support for terrorist organisations. Yet, a clear distinction between humanitarian aid and terrorism financing in a complex war zone is not always easy to draw: Which of the involved parties is perceived as a terrorist threat, and what is exactly considered humanitarian aid work? In this paper, we empirically unpack how EU counter-terrorism laws and policies are actually practiced during court trials. We investigate the legal distinction between humanitarian aid and terrorism financing in Syria, specifically centring on trials from the Netherlands and Germany. Drawing on the growing debates in critical security and legal studies on materiality, we focus on how materials presented during trials such as baby products, weapons, and money, are inscribed with a particular security logic to reach a legal verdict. Introducing the concept of “matters of care/security”, we connect these debates and findings to insights from feminist and post-colonial studies to critically inquire how racialised and gendered assumptions on terrorist threat impact terrorism trials.

Counterterrorism Law and Policy in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia: A Comparative Perspective

This article looks at the similarities and differences in British, Canadian, and Australian counterterrorism laws and policies. Canada and Australia are contrasted with the United Kingdom because their respective approaches to counterterrorism are based on the British approach, and yet have evolved to take into account differences in the nature and scope of the threat and the differing styles of governance in place in Canada and Australia. The article looks at each country in the context of: counterterrorism laws; detention and disruption practices; investigatory approaches; intelligence and law enforcement institutions; and the treatment of foreign fighters. The article then draws some conclusions regarding the evolution and divergence of counterterrorism law and policy in these countries and posits a question for future research.

Negotiating Fundamental Rights: Civil Society and the EU Regulation on Addressing the Dissemination of Terrorist Content Online

During the negotiations of the EU Regulation on addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online, digital and human rights activists raised concerns regarding the safeguarding of fundamental rights. These actors were partially successful in influencing aspects of the final text of the Regulation, thus, raising the question of how such groups have managed to influence traditionally “securitized” counterterrorism policy. This study compares the discourses employed by the different EU institutions and digital and human rights advocates during the negotiation period. Approaching this through the lens of politicization, this study demonstrates that whilst securitizing discourses persist to a certain extent, some aspects of EU counterterrorism law are open to contestation.

The Effectiveness ASEAN Political Security Community (APSC in The Implementation of ASEAN Convention on Counter Terrorism (ACCT) to Combat Terrorism in Southeast Asia

This research aims to explain the effectiveness of the ASEAN Political-Security Community (APSC) in implementing the ASEAN Convention on Counter-Terrorism (ACCT) to combat terrorism in Southeast Asia. Using qualitative research methods and data collection techniques, literature studies through various scientific works to understand and study the phenomena that will be discussed in this journal. Researchers see the potential and strength possessed by APSC in implementing ACCT in Southeast Asia. However, the existence of the ASEAN Way will complicate the implementation of the ACCT itself. Coupled with evidence on acts of terrorism in the Philippines, ACCT under the auspices of the APSC has not been able to stop the issues. The researcher also examines how each terrorist group ends, presenting that terrorist groups end up using regulation from the country itself through the domestic police, without regulatory interference from international organizations. In conclusion, the APSC has played a crucial role in enhancing regional cooperation and coordination to combat terrorism in Southeast Asia. The establishment of the ACTC and the adoption of common strategies and policies have been significant achievements in the implementation of the ACCT. However, more needs to be done to address the challenges and ensure consistent and effective enforcement of counter-terrorism laws across ASEAN member states.

Counter-Terrorism Update

A review of current developments in counter-terrorism law.

Ancaman Terorisme dan Strategi Penanganannya: Studi Pustaka Strategi Kontra-Terorisme di Kamboja

Various counter-terrorism efforts have been carried out by the Cambodian government, resulting in Cambodia being ranked 135th on the Global Terrorism Index as a country affected by terrorist action with a score of 0.00, meaning there are no more threats or acts of terrorism in Cambodia. This research aims to analyze the counter-terrorism efforts that have been carried out by the Government of Cambodia. This research uses a qualitative research method with a literature study approach. The results of the research show that in Cambodia, there are 7 (seven) terrorist groups, both domestic and foreign, namely: the Khmer Rouge; Cambodian Freedom Fighters /CFF; Khmer Front Movement; the Khmer National Unity Front / KNUF; Khmer National Liberation Front / KNLF; Empire Movement, and the Jemaah Islamiah / JI through the Om Al Qura Foundation. The strategy taken by the Government of Cambodia to address terrorism includes: the formation of counter-terrorism laws, the formation of special counter-terrorism forces and closing access to terrorism financing. In addition, at the ASEAN regional level, the Cambodian government has established cooperation with ASEAN countries in addressing terrorism through information exchange, joint training, and extradition. Meanwhile, at the international level, Cambodia also cooperates in counter-terrorism with the United States and Australia.

Anti-Terrorism Criminal Law: Where Emergency Regime Meets the Investigative Agenda

AbstractThis article aims to show how reform of the law on terrorism not only has the power to create new criminal procedures, it can also create a distinct, parallel field operating alongside general criminal law. This parallel configuration presents certain unique features and processes which merit their own typology – namely, anti-terrorism criminal law (ATCL). First, the article discusses how states have responded to terrorism through reform of four key arenas: military law, immigration law, administrative law and criminal law. Comparison is then drawn between the United States and Israel in their respective approaches, showing that Israel has executed far more sweeping and significant reforms over the last four decades, mainly in criminal procedure. Examples are given to illustrate how Israel's evolving anti-terrorism legislation – and specifically, the new Counter-Terrorism Law of 2016 – changed the criminal procedural landscape to such a degree that it constituted the new field of ATCL. I contend that this move was anti-liberal in its definition and targeting of terror suspects, and in its pursuit of emergency aims and intelligence gathering rather than liberal criminal law objectives. Further, I show that liberal theory struggles to explain the integrated change model that Israel has implemented in its counter-terrorism reforms, and that the theoretical framings of Carl Schmitt and Michel Foucault may explain it more effectively.