Terrorism and Community Relations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Terrorism and Community Relations Written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 14 December 2004 HC 165-II Published on 7 January 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £14.50 Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies; and the administration and expenditure of the Attorney General’s Office, the Treasury Solicitor’s Department, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Serious Fraud Office. Current membership Mr John Denham MP (Labour, Southampton, Itchen) (Chairman) Janet Anderson MP (Labour, Rossendale and Darwen) Mr James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Mrs Claire Curtis-Thomas MP (Labour, Crosby) Mrs Janet Dean MP (Labour, Burton) Mr Damian Green MP (Conservative, Ashford) Mr Gwyn Prosser MP (Labour, Dover) Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Mr Marsha Singh MP (Labour, Bradford West) Mr John Taylor MP (Conservative, Solihull) David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Dr Robin James (Clerk), Mr Mark Etherton (Second Clerk), Kate Akester (Adviser (Sentencing Guidelines)), Dr Ben Morris (Committee Legal Specialist), Mr Ian Thomson (Committee Assistant), Rowena Macdonald (Secretary) and Mr John-Paul Flaherty (Senior Office Clerk). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Home Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3276; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] . List of written evidence Page Association of Chief Police Officers Ev 1 Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council Ev 4 Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Community Security Trust Ev 5 Burnley Borough Council and Chief Superintendent of Lancashire Constabulary (Pennine Division) Ev 10 Campaign Against Criminalising Communities Ev 11 Catholic Bishop’s Conference of England and Wales Ev 11 Church of England Ev 14 City of London Police Ev 16 Council of Christians and Jews Ev 19 Crown Prosecution Service Ev 20 Paul Donovan Ev 23 Evangelical Alliance UK Ev 25 Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism Ev 29 Friends of Israel Educational Foundation Ev 37 Hindu Forum of Britain Ev 39 Home Office Ev 46 Human Rights Watch Ev 49 Independent Police Complaints Commission Ev 50 International Centre for Security Analysis Ev 51 Jewish Council for Racial Equality Ev 53 Leicester City Council Ev 54 Mayor of London Ev 55 Tony McNulty MP Ev 59 Metropolitan Police Diversity Directorate Ev 60 Ministry of Defence Ev 63 Muslim Council of Britain Ev 65 Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK Ev 72 Namdhari Sangat UK Ev 74 National Secular Society Ev 74 Network of Sikh Organisations Ev 80 Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism Ev 81 Police Federation of England and Wales Ev 84 Tariq Saied Ev 86 Sikh Community Action Network Ev 88 Slough Race Equality Council Ev 90 Swaminarayan Hindu Mission Ev 95 Union of Jewish Students Ev 96 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Ev 99 United Synagogue Ev 101 Young Muslims UK (London Branch) Ev 102 992102PAG1 Page Type [SO] 23-12-04 21:25:43 Pag Table: COENEW PPSysB Unit: PAG1 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 1 Written evidence 1. Memorandum submitted by the Association of Chief Police OYcers 1. Introduction 1.1 The Association of Chief Police OYcers recognises the vital importance of good community relations in counter-terrorism. The ACPO business areas of “Terrorism and Allied Matters” and “Race and Diversity” work closely ensuring that community aspects of counter-terrorism are built into our work both nationally and locally. 1.2 Our overall objective is to ensure counter-terrorist policing is as eVective as possible and conducted with the support, trust and confidence of communities. A minute proportion of the population is involved in terrorism, and there is a risk that we will create alienation and disaVection by our own actions. Our work plan seeks to treat the terrorist threat as an opportunity to ensure we have stronger links and support within communities, which will ultimately help deliver better policing services. 1.3 Counter-terrorism does not sit in isolation from other work and the wider themes of community cohesion and reassurance informs our response. We recognise the need to engage communities in our work, a key element of the Police Reform Agenda, and our ambition is to develop meaningful engagement within the context of counter-terrorism. 1.4 This submission outlines the community context we are dealing with, it explains some of the policing response and it describes examples of the specific work being carried out. The final section contains some recommendations for government that we believe will help in responding to community concerns. 2. The Context The Threat 2.1 The threat to the UK from international terrorism has been assessed at a high level since 11 September 2001. It is important to recognise that international terrorism—ie that linked to the methods and ideology of Al Qa’eda—represents a threat we have not seen before. The scale of devastation, death and injury contemplated by international terrorists is truly shocking. 2.2 We believe the threat to be widely recognised in communities of the UK. However, the lack of a delivered terrorist device has led to “alert fatigue” in some quarters and simple disbelief of the threat in others. Countering this scepticism is diYcult for two key reasons. Firstly, terrorist intelligence must be carefully managed in order to protect sources. Secondly, good information that might illustrate the reality of the current threat is currently sub judice. 3. Vulnerability 3.1 Police forces in the UK have been alert to the possibility of increased tension caused by fears of terrorism. 3.2 Muslim communities fear a backlash from those who associate terrorism with Islam. There are few police forces in England and Wales that monitor “Islamophobia” as a specific type of incident. Forces that do record Islamophobic incidents have found very low numbers of reported incidents. 3.3 Specific recording of faith hate crime has been established by ACPO as a minimum standard of service for all forces and will become national practice after the publication of the new Hate Crime Manual. In the meantime we have launched, in partnership with the Muslim Safety Forum, a nation-wide project to encourage third party reporting of Islamophobic incidents, responding to fears that much of this type of crime goes unreported. 3.4 Jewish and Israeli communities feel particularly vulnerable to attack. They have been mentioned repeatedly as a target in messages purportedly recorded by Al Qa’eda leaders and there have been attacks on Jewish targets abroad, for example, Istanbul and Djerba. The Jewish Community Security Trust has recorded an increase in acts of anti-Semitism in the first seven months of 2004. 3.5 Recently a joint CST and ACPO seminar was organised to ensure links and co-ordination with Jewish communities were as strong as possible. A national operational response plan exists in the event of a threat to Jewish premises or gatherings. 3.6 There is particular concern about the vulnerabilities of businesses to terrorist attack. A failure to address the threat could see re-location of key businesses away from the UK. Forces have been circulated a menu of options for working in partnership with businesses under the banner of Operation Rainbow and there are a number of examples of successful preventative measures. 9921021001 Page Type [E] 23-12-04 21:25:43 Pag Table: COENEW PPSysB Unit: PAG1 Ev 2 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence 4. Police Operations 4.1 Muslim communities are concerned about what is increasingly seen as unfair targeting by police under counter-terrorism powers. Many Muslims refute the need for arrests under the Terrorism Act where charges have not followed. 4.2 Additionally, many see the increase of Asians stopped and searched under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act, publicised in the recent release of 2001–02 stop and search statistics, as an example of Islamophobia. 4.3 When police activity is combined with the view, held in some quarters, that the threat is exaggerated at best and non-existent at worst, counter-terrorist activity is seen as wholly disproportionate. 4.4 From a police perspective there have been 460 arrests for international terrorism since 11 September 2001 (the widely quoted figure of 609 includes domestic and Irish terrorism) and a significant number are as a result of short-term detention at points of entry into the United Kingdom. 54 of the 460 have been charged with terrorist act oVences but over half (236) of all those arrested have been charged with other criminal oVences. 4.5 A charge rate of over 50% compares favourably with the rate achieved for similarly complex and diYcult investigations. Critics can point to a very low conviction rate for the terrorist charges, but this is not a result of wholesale acquittals, rather the slow progress to court of many cases. We expect to see a number of high profile court cases concluded and reported upon within the next 12–18 months. 4.6 In practice, the number of pre-planned operations has been relatively small and each one the subject of much discussion and consideration.