BRITAIN: The British government is considering introducing new offences to combat the threat from al- Qaeda and other extremists, it was confirmed yesterday.
Home Secretary, Mr David Blunkett, said his controversial internment powers will remain an "essential component" of the government's anti-terrorism measures.
But extending similar powers to British citizens would be a "grave step" which would be "difficult to justify", he said.
It was a significant watering down of comments made by Mr Blunkett three weeks ago during an official visit to India when he called for a debate on whether the standard of proof should be lowered to make it easier to secure terror convictions.
Mr Blunkett had also suggested a new, secret court system would be necessary to protect intelligence sources, including vetted judges and defence solicitors.
But explicit proposals of this type were absent from yesterday's document.
In contrast, it said ministers were "willing to consider any realistic alternative proposals and approaches which take account of the government's human rights obligations".
The Liberal Democrats said it was an apparent climbdown and an "extraordinary embarrassment" for Mr Blunkett.
The document did confirm that officials were reviewing whether bugged phone calls and monitored e-mail should be admissible evidence in British courts. "It is important to ensure that any decision on whether or not to change the law is based on a rigorous assessment of the likely impact (e.g. in securing more prosecutions) and clear evidence that the benefits of doing so clearly outweigh the risks," said the paper.
It added: "There are already a wide range of criminal and terrorist-related offences that can be used to bring prosecutions.
"The government is considering whether further offences should be introduced." The document also revealed that plans to introduce an offence of "incitement to religious hatred" were back on the cards after faltering in 2001.
Mr Blunkett admitted that he risked "being derided as ineffectual" for publishing a paper that raised more questions than it answered.
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, Mr Mark Oaten, said: "The absence of any mention of the burden of proof is an extraordinary embarrassment for the Home Secretary."