THE Government’s anti-terrorism laws were in disarray last night after the High Court ruled that they were illegal and breached the human rights of suspects.

The decision destroyed a key part of the Government’s armoury in the fight against terrorism. Mr Justice Sullivan said in the High Court that the Home Secretary had no power to issue control orders, which place restrictions just short of house arrest on terrorist suspects.

The ruling is the latest clash between the Government and the judiciary over human rights, and will reignite the debate over whether the Human Rights Act should be reformed.

John Reid attacked the ruling yesterday and promised to fight the judgment in the Appeal Court. The Home Secretary said that control orders had been introduced to protect the public against foreign citizens who posed a risk to the country. He said that, if foreign terrorist suspects could not be deported because they might face torture, the Government had to find another way to protect the public if prosecution were not possible.

Mr Reid added: “That is why the Government introduced control-order legislation, which can be used as a last resort to address the threat from both foreign nationals and British citizens. The obligations contained in control orders are necessary to protect the public and proportionate to the threat that these individuals pose.”

The High Court ruling means that half of the 14 control orders now imposed on foreign and British citizens have been declared illegal.

Mr Justice Sullivan said that the orders breached Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prevents detention without trial.

“It follows that the [Home Secretary] had no power to make the orders and they must therefore all be quashed,” Mr Justice Sullivan said at the end of a High Court case brought by five Iraqis and another suspect.

In April the same judge ruled that control orders were an “affront to justice” because they denied people a right to a fair hearing.

Control orders were introduced after the law lords ruled in December 2004 that holding terrorist suspects in prison without charge or trial was unlawful. Individuals can be restricted to their homes, have curbs placed on access to phones, the internet and other people. They can be ordered to hand in their passports and give the police unrestricted access to their homes.

Natalia Garcia, of law firm Tyndallwoods, representing the five Iraqis and one other suspect, said that the judge’s ruling was a victory for civil liberties. Ms Garcia added: “What they have done is to impose conditions of such draconian severity as to be a deprivation of liberty.”

A spokesman for Tony Blair said that he had not yet seen the full judgment. “Parliament discussed the principle and the implementation of control orders, and we always made it clear that if necessary we would take it through the courts as far as necessary and possible — but let us see what the final judgment is.”

David Davis, Shadow Home Secretary, said: “When control orders were first debated we warned the Government that exactly this might happen, and explicitly offered them the option of extending the time limit on the old legislation, specifically to give them time to think.”

Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “This decision shows the dangers of rushed and ill thought out legislation on such an important issue.”

The Government’s terrorism law adviser, Lord Carlile of Berriew, QC, said the Government could amend the details of the orders to comply with human rights laws, for example by reducing the scope of curfews and lifting some restrictions.

TAKING CONTROL

Sept 2001 Attacks on Trade Centre in New York and Pentagon

Oct David Blunkett publishes Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill allowing indefinite detention of foreign terrorist suspects without charge or trial

Dec Act becomes law. Eight suspects detained

July 2002 Special Immigration Appeals Commission rulesthat law is discriminatory and unlawful

Oct Court of Appeal overturns the ruling

Dec Law lords rule that law is incompatible with European Convention on Human Rights

Feb 2005 Charles Clarke publishes new Prevention of Terrorism Bill allowing terror suspects to be tagged March Prevention of Terrorism Bill becomes law

June 2006 High Court rules control order law is not compatible with human rights laws

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• The best legal yarns this Christmas
• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers