Lidská práva a boj proti terorismu

This text, which is entitled “Human Rights and Fight against Terrorism”, is concerned with utmost topical problem – a fine line between a legitimate confrontation with international terrorist groups and illegal violation of basic human right and liberties in name of that confrontation. To find out where the line lies is the pivotal task for nations and, especially in recent years, also for the European Union and its institutions. The author of this text tried to find out up-to-date facts, legal implications and trends in this very specific legal area. The first chapter deals with a legal framework for actions against terrorism in European law. It describes the institutes of the second and especially the third pillar of EU law. The second chapter is concerned with concrete actions and measures adopted by the European Union in order to limit terrorism. Since the Union generally does not posses enough power to chase the terrorists directly, the nature of these measures is mainly preventive because of the intergovernmental character of the third pillar. The Union also tends to harmonize the legal systems of law of the Members States. Despite of said above, the Union still has some limited power to face the terrorism directly. The very effective and important way to face the terrorist organizations is to freeze their benefits. Other ways to ensure security within the EU borders are based on effective asylum and immigration policy. The question whether these measures infringe basic human right is analysed in the third chapter of this text. The European Court of Justice already faced this question recently. In September 2005, the European Court of Justice rendered a crucial decision in Ahmed Ali Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation and Yassin Abdullah Kadi v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities. The Court ruled that the challenged regulation on freezing benefits was consistent with basic human rights and the action was dismissed. Another very important decision dealing with the fight against terrorism and human rights – but on national level – came from House of Lords of the United Kingdom in December 2005. Seven judges in the Britain’s supreme court ruled that intelligence extracted by torture is not admissible in any British court. Lawyers and human right activists hope the judgment will reverberate around the world, putting beyond doubt that the ban on torture was absolute in civilised countries. Other controversies were sparked in connection with a controversial agreement between EU and USA on air passenger data transfer to the United States which can breach i.e. EU data protection laws. The fight against terrorism became a very important part of EU agenda. The mail question of this agenda, how much the security interests can interfere with basic human rights, is still to be answered.