Policing Terrorism Research Studies into Police Counterterrorism Investigations

Based primarily upon information from the UK Special Branch Counterterrorism Unit, Policing Terrorism: Research Studies into Police Counterterrorism Investigations takes you through the mechanics of a counterterrorism investigation. A combination of legal and empirical research, this entry in the Advances in Police Theory and Practice book series examines subjects that include surveillance, intelligence gathering, and informants. It also addresses practical obstacles in counterterrorist investigations. The first section of the book conducts a comparative study of laws governing terrorist investigations in the UK, US, Canada, and Australia. It compares the legal definition of terrorism in each country and how it has been incorporated into the statutes regarding terrorism—except in the case of the US, which has not established a definition of terrorism. The book locates similarities in the legal jurisdictions of cooperating countries and discusses how legal gaps can create difficulties for international cooperation. The second section contains empirical studies on practical aspects of terrorist investigations and the activities of terrorist organizations. It evaluates operational officers’ discretion in using the powers granted to them and analyzes terrorist organizations’ methods in radicalizing and recruiting people to their causes. It also explores the critical role of informants in gathering intelligence, covering a broad range of issues including integrity, risk assessment, ethics of handling informants, police interrogation of suspects, and the use of informants at trial. With many governments currently at a high threat level, increased international cooperation among counterterrorism agencies is imperative. Policing Terrorism presents several pathways to generating more effective cooperation. It provides you with information on factors that help or hurt cooperation while suggesting what can be done to improve current counterterrorist laws and practices.

THE LAW GOVERNING TERRORISM INVESTIGATIONSLegal Definition of TerrorismIntroductionLegal Definitions of TerrorismDefining and Ascertaining Evidence That Amounts to a Religious CauseA Religious Cause in Collecting or Possessing Information That May Be Useful to a TerroristA Religious Cause in Distributing or Circulating Terrorist PublicationsIs a Wide Legal Definition of Terrorism Assisting Agencies Identifying a Disproportionate Risk in Society?ConclusionGovernment Policies and Statutory Preventative MeasuresGovernment Policies Related to Preventing or Pre-Empting Acts of Terrorism: The Risk Is Not Disproportionate, The Risk Is RealExamples of Statutory Preventative MeasuresSummary on Statutory Preventative MeasuresProscribed Organizations/Listed Foreign Terrorist OrganizationsSummary on Proscribed/Banned Groups Quasi-Criminal Preventative Measures: The Example of the UK’s Terrorism Prevention and Investigative Measures Act 2011Legal Development of TpimsOverview of the Operation of TpimsNSA, PRISM Project, Journalistic Material, and Schedule 7 Powers: A Case Study of a Terrorism Preventative Stop and Search Measure Used at the National Level in Response to an International IncidentSchedule 7 Terrorism Act 2000 PowersJudicial Response to Schedule 7 PowersDetention Periods and Review of DetentionProportionality and the Interests of National Security or Individual LibertySummary on the High Court’s Decision in MirandaConclusionSurveillance and International Terrorism Intelligence Exchange: Balancing the Interests of National Security and Individual LibertyIntroductionSurveillance Powers Used in Terrorism InvestigationsIntelligence Exchange between the US and the UK: The Role of EuropolThe Snowden Affair, National Security Interests and Protecting Individual RightsThe Importance of the Snowden Documents to UK AuthoritiesBalancing the Interests of National Security with Individual Rights: Democracies, Neo-Democracies and the Legal Principle of ProportionalityLegal Challenges to US Surveillance LawsUK Courts and the ECHRIssues Surrounding Control Orders and BlacklistsConclusion: The Balance between the Interests of National Security and Individuals’ LibertyFunding TerrorismIntroductionProvisions Related to Funding Terrorism under the UK’s Terrorism LegislationThe Disproportionate and Oppressive Nature of the Terrorism Order Rendering It Ultra ViresEuropean Court of Justice’s (ECJ’s) Decision Being Influential in the Supreme Court’s Decision in H.M. Treasury v Mohammad Jabar Ahmed and OthersUK’s Terror Asset-Freezing Act of 2010 (TAFA)The US Statutory Provision in Relation to the Funding of TerrorismThe Judicial Response to Lack of Judicial Scrutiny of Asset Freezing SCRsConclusionINVESTIGATING TERRORISMLack of Discretion in High PolicingIntroductionResearch Methods UsedHigh PolicingThe Dichotomy Between Previous Police Research and This StudyInitial Action Taken in CTU Counterterrorist Investigations: It Is Ownership, Not DiscretionIntelligence GatheringCTU Operational Officers’ Attitudes Toward the Law: Followed to the Letter or Just a Rough Guide?Terrorism Legislation: Extension of Power or Extension of Discretion?ConclusionRadicalization of Terrorist Causes: A Study of the 32CSM/IRA Threat to UK SecurityIntroductionRadicalizationResearch Method UsedBackground to the ResearchRadicalization Process in IrelandLoyalist Paramilitary Violence: Fueling and Legitimizing the Fire of 32CSM/IRA’s Cause?Conclusion: Radicalizing Individuals in Britain Support to the 32CSM/IRA CauseRecruiting Informants in Counterterrorism Investigations: Is Loss of Integrity a Noble Cause?IntroductionNoble Cause CorruptionPolice Recruitment of InformantsResearch MethodTurning Suspects into InformantsRole Conflict and Police Officer IntegrityConclusionHandling InformantsIntroductionLaw or Policy in Handling InformantsUK’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers ActPolicies on the Use of Informants in Other StatesEthical Issues in Handling InformantsInformants: The Necessary EvilEthical Handling of InformantsThe 1968-1997 Irish Troubles: A Case Study in Unethical Police Handling of InformantsEvidence of InformantsImmunity from Prosecution/Reduction in SentenceInformant Witness Anonymity in Criminal TrialsConclusion

David Lowe is a principal lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University Law School. Prior to becoming an academic, he was a police officer for 27 years with the UK’s Merseyside Police, with the majority of his service spent as a detective in the Special Branch Counterterrorism Unit. His research in policing, terrorism, and security has been published in books and journals. He also coedited the second volume of Trends in the Judiciary: Interviews with Judges from across the Globe. He is a regular contributor to Westlaw’s legal encyclopaedia, Insight, on legal issues related to terrorism, and is regularly used by the television, radio, and the print media in the UK, Europe, and the United States for commentary in these areas.