BRITAIN: Newly appointed Home Secretary Mr Charles Clarke faced a threatened "constitutional crisis" yesterday as the Law Lords ruled Britain's internment of foreign terror suspects discriminatory, disproportionate and unlawful.
However, a defiant Mr Clarke asserted the primacy of Parliament as he made clear the government would not be opening the doors of Broadmoor or Belmarsh Prison where 12 terrorist suspects are detained without trial.
The landmark ruling by a majority of eight to one Law Lords dealt a blow to the Blair government's anti-terror measures - a key part of Mr Clarke's controversial political inheritance from Mr David Blunkett - amid continuing fallout from Mr Blunkett's dramatic resignation on Wednesday night.
And the Conservatives were on the offensive last night - inferring an attempted "cover-up" in response to the Budd Inquiry which finally unearthed the paper trail confirming Mr Blunkett's office had helped fast-track the visa application of his former lover's nanny - while suggesting Mr Clarke might have to abandon his detention powers.
Responding to the Law Lords' ruling, Shadow Home Secretary Mr David Davis said: "This judgment should not come as a surprise. We warned the government at the time they passed this legislation that it would be difficult to justify." The Law Lords found it unjustified yesterday in terms of the level of terrorist threat posed, and voted to quash Britain's derogation from the European Convention because the rules allowed detentions "in a way that discriminates on the grounds of nationality or immigration status" by permitting the detention without trial of foreign nationals, but not Britons.
The findings - delivered by a panel of nine Law Lords rather than the usual five because of the constitutional importance of the issues - were hailed by lawyers for the detainees on whose behalf the appeal to the Lords was made. Solicitor Ms Gareth Peirce suggested the government risked "a constitutional crisis" if it chose to ignore their decision.
Ms Peirce said four of the detainees had been driven to "madness" and that a further four had had their mental health seriously affected. And she said the detainees would look to the European Court of Human Rights if ministers did not respond swiftly.
Ms Shami Chakrabati, director of Liberty, echoed Ms Peirce's warning about the implications for the government. "Internment has been a festering sore on our nation's conscience for nearly three years," she said: "By acting as judge, jury and jailer the government has flouted the very values it claims to defend. It must now act and charge or release all those currently held without delay. To flout such a clear ruling from the House of Lords would be something approaching a constitutional crisis, but I do not believe that will happen."
However in a written statement to MPs, Mr Clarke said the internment powers set out in the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act would remain and that he would be seeking their renewal early in the new year. As Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs complained that Mr Clarke had not appeared in the Commons to make an oral statement, the new Home Secretary declared: "It is ultimately for Parliament to decide whether and how we should amend the law . . .
"I will not be revoking the certificates or releasing the detainees, whom I have reason to believe are a significant threat to our security, a judgment upheld by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, chaired by a High Court judge."
At the same time Mr Clarke said he would be studying the judgment "to see whether it is possible to modify our legislation to address the concerns raised by the House of Lords".
One option, thought politically unacceptable, would be for the government to extend the internment power to apply to British nationals. In addition to the admission of "phone tap" evidence in courts advocated by the Conservatives, ministers are also thought to be considering special non-jury security courts and new laws covering acts preparatory to terrorism and association with "wrong-doers."
While Mr Blair again praised Mr Blunkett for his "integrity and dignity", Mr Davis said it stretched "credulity" that not only Mr Blunkett, but his permanent secretary, the head of the Immigration and Nationality Department and all the officials involved failed to recall what had happened in respect to the controversial visa for the nanny of Mr Blunkett's former lover.