On Tuesday 3rd March MPs voted to renew the Control Orders system that has been functioning since the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. The vote to renew the system for another year received support from both the Labour and Conservative parties although the Liberal Democrats opposed the scheme.

Liberal Democrat MP Chris Huhne described the move as “perilously close to reversing a very fundamental principle of our criminal justice system that we are guilty until proven innocent”. Although supporting the vote, Conservative spokesman for Home Affairs Crispin Blunt told the House of Commons that the orders, “damage the basic notion of British liberty and to the values we seek to defend”.

The renewal of the act was opposed by human rights groups such as Liberty which has condemned the orders as “unsafe and unfair”. Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti called on MPs to oppose the Act saying that, “Any MP who believes in fair trials and regaining Britain’s moral authority must vote against this cruel and self-defeating nonsense today”. It has been argued that Control Orders should be abandoned and the criminal justice system improved to counter terrorism by allowing courts to hear evidence from interception.

Human Rights Watch drew attention to the fact that Control Orders were intended to be a temporary expedient after the Law Lords ruled indefinite detention of foreign suspects unlawful. “After three years, there is no excuse for keeping in place a flawed system that violates rights,” said Judith Sunderland, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch.

Control Orders give the government powers to impose lengthy curfews of up to 18 hours per day on suspects and deprive them of internet and mobile phone access. Suspects are deprived of unauthorised visitors. Suspects do not have to have any charges brought against them and are often unaware of why they are under suspicion.

Meanwhile, three men under Control Orders are appealing to the Lords, arguing that the procedure contradicts Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees the individual’s right to a fair hearing.