THE VIRES OF PRE-CHARGE TERROR DETENTION IN PAKISTAN AND THE UK: A LIBERAL CRITIQUE AND COMPARISON MUHAMMAD FAYAZ MSc Sociological Research, University of Manchester LLM Human Rights Law, University of Warwick LLB University of Peshawar, Pakistan A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Central Lancashire October 2018 Page 1 of 272 DECLARATION Type of Award: Doctor of Philosophy School: Lancashire Law School 1. Concurrent registration for two or more academic awards I declare that while registered as a candidate for the research degree, I have not been a registered candidate or enrolled student for another award of the University or other academic or professional institution. 2. Material submitted for another award I declare that no material contained in the thesis has been used in any other submission for an academic award and is solely my own work. 3. Collaboration I declare that this is my sole research project and that it was not carried in collaboration, whatsoever, with anyone. Signature of Candidate: Print name: MUHAMMAD FAYAZ Page 2 of 272 ABSTRACT This research examines the treatment of terror detainees during pre­charge detention in Pakistan and the UK. Pakistan is the principal focus and the UK acts as a comparator thereto. Suspected terrorists are more vulnerable to maltreatment during pre­ charge detention. Their vulnerability increases more in a country like Pakistan where more than 60,000 people have died in various terrorist attacks. Arguably, there is no case­ study on the topic in Pakistan and the UK has not been used as a comparator. This scholarship, therefore, attempts to fill the gap by evaluating the treatment of terror detainees during pre­charge detention in Pakistan by using relevant human rights law and principles as a yardstick and the UK as a comparator to the main case. This scholarship uses liberal critique research methodology assessing pre­charge terror detention in the following six themes: the period of pre­charge terror detention; police interrogation and questioning; internal police review mechanisms; police records; the rights of a terror suspect to contact the outside world; and the detention conditions. The relevant anti­terror legislation of the two countries will be used to find the law on the topic. The related provisions in the UDHR, ICCPR and UNCAT will also be used to find out how we ought to treat terror detainees in a criminal justice system. The results show that the UK fulfils most of its human rights obligations, while Pakistan does not. The UK provides a maximum period of 14 days for pre­charge detention, while Pakistan has 90 days. A terror suspect can be interrogated for up to two hours at a time in the UK, while police interrogation sessions in Pakistan are unlimited. The UK includes internal police review mechanism as a check on the special powers of the police, while there is no such arrangement in Pakistan. The countries also differ in their police records, the rights of a terror suspect to contact the outside world and the detention conditions. Consequently, Pakistan can arguably learn from the UK’s experience on the topic. Page 3 of 272 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title 1 Declaration 2 Abstract 3 Table of Contents 4 Acknowledgements 8 Abbreviations 9 Chapter One 10-37 Introduction 1.0 Background 10 Part I 1.1.0 WHAT? The Main Focus of this Research 14 1.1.1 The Legal Nature of Pre­charge Detention 17 1.1.2 The Period of Pre­charge Detention 21 1.1.3 Police Interrogation and Questioning 22 1.1.4 Internal Police Review Mechanisms 23 1.1.5 Police Records 24 1.1.6 Rights of a Terror Suspect to Contact the Outside World 25 1.1.7 Detention Conditions 26 1.1.8 The Main Argument of the Thesis 26 Part II 1.2.0 WHY? The Research Purposes 30 Part III 1.3.0 HOW? The Methodology 32 Part IV 1.4.0 Thesis Structure 35 Chapter Two 38-73 Literature Review 2.0 Introduction 38 Part I 2.1.0 Theoretical Framework 39 2.1.1 Conservative Approaches to Security 40 2.1.2 Liberal Critique of the Conservative Approaches to Security 46 Page 4 of 272 Part II 2.2.0 Liberal and Conservative Stances on the Treatment of Terror Suspects 55 2.2.1 The Period of Pre­charge Detention 56 2.2.2 Police Interrogation and Questioning 57 2.2.3 Internal Police Review Mechanisms 58 2.2.4 Police Records 59 2.2.5 Rights of a Terror Suspect to Contact the Outside World 59 2.2.6 Detention Conditions 60 Part III 2.3.0 Indicating a Niche 62 Part IV 2.4.0 Conclusion 71 Chapter Three 74-103 Human Rights Law Regulating Pre-charge Terror Detention 3.0 Introduction 74 Part I 3.1.0 Human Rights Law in General 75 3.1.1 International Human Rights Law 75 3.1.2 Regional Human Rights Laws for the UK and Pakistan 80 3.1.3 Domestic Human Rights Laws for the UK and Pakistan 82 Part II 3.2.0 Human Rights Law Regulating the Treatment of Terror Suspects 86 3.2.1 The Period of Pre­charge Detention 86 3.2.2 Police Interrogation and Questioning 95 3.2.3 Internal Police Review Mechanisms 99 3.2.4 Police Records 100 3.2.5 Rights of a Terror Suspect to Contact the Outside World 100 3.2.6 Detention Conditions 101 Part III 3.3.0 Conclusion 102 Chapter Four 104-151 Pre-charge Terror Detention in Focus: An Assessment of the Law and Practice in the UK 4.0 Introduction 104 Part I 4.1.0 Major Terror Incidents in the UK 106 Part II 4.2.0 Pre­charge Terror Detention in the UK: Law, Practice and Assessment 111 Page 5 of 272 4.2.1.A. The Period of Pre­charge Detention: Law and Assessment 112 4.2.1.B. The Period of Pre­charge Detention in Practice 125 4.2.2. A. Police Interrogation and Questioning: Law and Assessment 127 4.2.2.B. Police Interrogation and Questioning in Practice 130 4.2.3. A. Internal Police Review Mechanisms: Law and Assessment 135 4.2.3.B. Internal Police Review Mechanisms in Practice 139 4.2.4. A. Police Records: Law and Assessment 139 4.2.4. B. Police Records in Practice 140 4.2.5.A. Rights of a Terror Suspect to Access the Outside World: Law and Assessment 142 4.2.5.B. Rights of a Terror Suspect to Access the Outside World in Practice 144 4.2.6.A. Detention Conditions: Law and Assessment 146 4.2.6.B. Detention Conditions in Practice 148 Part III 4.3.0 Conclusion 149 Chapter Five 152-228 Pre-charge Terror Detention in Pakistan: An Assessment of the Law and Practice 5.0 Introduction 152 Part I 5.1.0 Major Terror Incidents in Pakistan 154 Part II 5.2.0 Pre­charge Terror Detention in Pakistan: Law, Practice and Assessment 169 5.2.1.A. The Period of Pre­charge Detention: Law and Assessment 169 5.2.1.B. The Period of Pre­charge Detention in Practice 197 5.2.2. A. Police Interrogation and Questioning: Law and Assessment 200 5.2.2.B. Police Interrogation and Questioning in Practice 205 5.2.3. A. Internal Police Review Mechanisms: Law and Assessment 209 5.2.3.B. Internal Police Review Mechanisms in Practice 212 5.2.4. A. Police Records: Law and Assessment 213 5.2.4. B. Police Records in Practice 216 5.2.5.A. Rights of a Terror Suspect to Access the Outside World: Law and Assessment 218 5.2.5.B. Rights of a Terror Suspect to Access the Outside World in Practice 220 5.2.6.A. Detention Conditions: Law and Assessment 221 5.2.6.B. Detention Conditions in Practice 223 Part III 5.3.0 Conclusion 225 Page 6 of 272 Chapter Six 229-255 Conclusion 6.0 Introduction 229 Part I 6.1.0 Lessons for Pakistan 230 6.1.1 The Period of Pre­charge Detention 231 6.1.2 Police Interrogation and Questioning 239 6.1.3 Internal Police Review Mechanisms 240 6.1.4 Police Records 242 6.1.5 Rights of a Terror Suspect to Contact the Outside World 243 6.1.6 Detention Conditions 244 Part II 6.2.0 Lessons for the UK 246 6.2.1 The Period of Pre­charge Detention 246 6.2.2 Police Interrogation and Questioning 249 6.2.3 Internal Police Review Mechanisms 250 6.2.4 Police Records 251 6.2.5 Rights of a Terror Suspect to Contact the Outside World 252 6.2.6 Detention Conditions 252 Part III 6.3.0 Further Research and Implications 252 Bibliography 256-272 Page 7 of 272 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Today, this task is accomplished by the grace of Allah Almighty who is the most Merciful. It was He who gave me the courage, enthusiasm and health for the four consecutive years to complete this research. Mankind cannot thank His bounties because these are in great abundance. I would like to express my gratitude for my director of studies, Dr Ian David Turner for his wonderful supervision. Each supervisory meeting with Dr Turner has been an inspiring delight. Dr Turner’s kind help and advice has always encouraged me to go further up the steep curve. He always made himself available each time I contacted him.