BRITAIN: The lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, head of the British judiciary, is planning to push through legislation that would for the first time tell judges how to interpret the Human Rights Act should they block the government's tough new deportation policy.
The legislation would force judges to give equal weight in their assessment of cases to the interests of state security as to the rights of the individual deportee. Such a move could put ministers on a collision course with the UK courts, which in recent months have clashed with the government in their role as protector of civil liberties.
The first 10 foreign nationals to face deportation under the government's new anti-terrorism stance were yesterday rounded up in raids across Britain. Nine, nearly all former Belmarsh terror detainees, face being sent back to Algeria - a country with one of the poorest human rights records in north Africa.
The 10th was the radical preacher described as al Qaeda's "ambassador in Europe", Abu Qatada. He faces being deported to his native Jordan, which this week signed a "no death penalty, no torture" agreement with the UK.
In an interview, Lord Falconer said he defended the civil rights role of judges and stressed he would only take the unprecedented step of amending the 1998 Human Rights Act if his hand were forced.
The amended law would set out the need to take account of the rights of national security, as well as the right of the deportee to be free from the risk of torture or ill-treatment anywhere, as enshrined in article three of the European convention on human rights.
Primary legislation setting out how the courts should interpret article three "is the sensible way of staying inside the convention, but have a sensible policy on deportation".
Lord Falconer also wants an independent judge to evaluate telephone-tapped evidence from the security services in pre-trial hearings which might get rid of the need for control orders by securing more convictions in open court.
He will impose his interpretation of the act if judges reject the agreement signed with Jordan, and expected soon to be replicated with Algeria, on the grounds they provide insufficient safeguards for returning deportees against torture or degrading treatment.
He rejected claims that the memorandums of understanding would be worthless given the countries' human rights records.
"It will be for the courts to decide if the assurances, and proposed independent monitoring, are adequate," he said.
Whitehall sources confirmed last night that nine of the 10 seized yesterday are Algerian. Seven of them have been detained without trial as terror suspects in Belmarsh prison for up to three years before being released on control orders after their internment was ruled unlawful.
Last night the 10 were back in the maximum security prisons conditions at Full Sutton, near York, and Long Lartin, Worcestershire. Their lawyers, Birnberg Pierce, protested that they were being moved around the country to prevent them being in contact with their legal representatives.
It is expected the men will appeal against detention and deportation - actions that will halt their immediate removal.
The prospect of sending the men back to Jordan and Algeria horrified human rights and Muslim groups in Britain. Amnesty International said the assurances "of known torturers were not worth the paper they were written on", while the Muslim Council of Britain warned against turning a "blind eye to torture".