Counter-Terrorism, Human Rights and the Rule of Law
Show Less

Counter-Terrorism, Human Rights and the Rule of Law

Crossing Legal Boundaries in Defence of the State

Edited by Aniceto Masferrer and Clive Walker

The initial responses to 9/11 engaged categorical questions about ‘war’, ‘terrorism’, and ‘crime’. Now the implementation of counter-terrorism law is infused with dichotomies – typically depicted as the struggle between security and human rights, but explored more exactingly in this book as traversing boundaries around the roles of lawyers, courts, and crimes; the relationships between police, military, and security agencies; and the interplay of international and national enforcement. The contributors to this book explore how developments in counter-terrorism have resulted in pressures to cross important ethical, legal and organizational boundaries. They identify new tensions and critique the often unwanted outcomes within common law, civil law, and international legal systems.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 3: The fragility of fundamental rights in the origins of modern constitutionalism

Aniceto Masferrer


The terrorist attacks on the 11th of September 2001, followed by those that took place in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005, opened up a debate about the difficulty of maintaining a suitable balance between the need for security and the defence of human rights in the context of the fight against terrorism in democratic States. This debate has focused on the question of the degree to which democratic States are justified in restricting or even violating the fundamental rights and liberties of individuals in order to guarantee national security. The abuses committed in Guantánamo, the military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the promulgation, in a number of States, of legislation designed to establish a series of preventative measures and to punish acts of terror- ism, following the passing of Resolution 1373 by the United Nations Security Council, have all posed serious and complex questions to scholars in a range of disciplines, particularly those of Law, Philosophy and Political Science. More importantly, one may wonder whether reasonable boundaries may be set up here between individual rights and collective security, as well as internal boundaries within rights on a scale of fundamentalism. In principle (though perhaps only purely theoretically), there is a general consensus that human rights constitute a limit to State action, a boundary that States must not cross, however fine and laudable the ends they seek to pursue might be.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.