Laws enacted against terrorism
| This article
may need to be rewritten
to comply with Wikipedia's
quality standards
, as more sources is required, and thorough reclassification of legal system is needed.
You can help
. The
talk page
may contain suggestions.
(
May 2022
)
|
Anti-terrorism legislation
are
laws
with the purpose of fighting
terrorism
. They usually, if not always, follow specific
bombings
or
assassinations
.
Anti-terrorism
legislation usually includes specific amendments allowing the state to bypass its own legislation when fighting terrorism-related crimes, under alleged grounds of necessity.
Because of this suspension of regular procedure, such legislation is sometimes criticized as a form of
lois scelerates
which may unjustly repress all kinds of popular protests. Critics often allege that anti-terrorism legislation endangers democracy by creating a
state of exception
that allows
authoritarian
style of government.
International conventions related to terrorism and counter-terrorism cases
[
edit
]
Terrorism has been on the international agenda since 1934, when the
League of Nations
, predecessor of the
United Nations
, began the elaboration of a convention for the prevention and punishment of terrorism.
[1]
Although the convention was eventually adopted in 1937, it never came into force.
Today, there are 15 counter-terrorism international conventions in force. They were developed under the auspices of the United Nations and its specialized agencies and the
International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA). Moreover, on 8 September 2006, the
UN General Assembly
adopted a "Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy".
[2]
Conventions open to all states
[
edit
]
A 16th international convention, a proposed
Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism
, is currently under negotiations.
Security Council Resolutions
[
edit
]
- UN Security Council Resolution 731
(January 21, 1992)
- UN Security Council Resolution 748
(March 31, 1992)
- UN Security Council Resolution 883
(November 11, 1993)
- September 28, 2001
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373
adopted under
Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter
, which makes it legally binding to member states. Among other provisions, it favored the exchange of
intelligence
between member states and legislative reforms. It established the
United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee
(CTC) to monitor state compliance with its provisions. Later resolutions concerning the same matter were UNSC resolutions
1390
,
1456
, 1535 (which restructured the CTC), 1566, and 1624.
Regional conventions
[
edit
]
Europe
[
edit
]
Commonwealth of Independent States
[
edit
]
The Americas
[
edit
]
Africa
[
edit
]
Asia
[
edit
]
- SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism
(Kathmandu, November 1987)
- Additional Protocol to the convention, Islamabad, January 2004 [As of 30 August 2005 not yet in force].
- The ASEAN Convention On Counter Terrorism, Cebu, Philippines, 13 January 2007 [In force from 27 May 2011, on 22 January 2013 all ASEAN members signed the ACCT]
South Korea
[
edit
]
- Act on prohibition against the financing of terrorism (February 29, 2008)
→(rev)Act on prohibition against the financing of terrorism and proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction
(March 29, 2016)
- Act on anti-terrorism for the protection of citizens and public security
[6]
(March 3, 2016)
League of Arab States
[
edit
]
Organization of the Islamic Conference
[
edit
]
Anti-terrorist legislation in the European Union
[
edit
]
European Union
[
edit
]
European Court of Human Rights cases related to anti-terrorist legislation
[
edit
]
Belgium
[
edit
]
- Belgium Anti-Terrorism Act 2003
France
[
edit
]
France has passed a variety of anti-terrorist laws, the first of which being the 19th-century
lois scelerates
restricting freedom of expression
. Today, magistrates in the
Justice Ministry
anti-terrorism unit have authority to detain people suspected of "conspiracy in relation to terrorism" while evidence is gathered against them.
[7]
Ireland
[
edit
]
Italy
[
edit
]
Italy passed various anti-terrorist laws during the "
Years of Lead
" (
anni di piombo
) in the 1970s.
The Reale Act was adopted on 22 May 1975. It allowed the police to carry out searches and arrest persons without being mandated by an investigative judge. Interrogation could take place without the presence of a lawyer. Critics underlined that this contradicted article 3 of the
Constitution
on equality before the law.
[9]
Preventive detention was fixed before 1970 to two years, for a possible sentence going between 20 years to perpetuity, while it was limited to one year for charges of crimes leading to a sentence of less than 20 years. It passed to four years after 1970. A
decree
-law of 11 April 1974 authorized a four-year detention until the first judgment, six years until the appeal, and eight years until the definitive judgment. In case of indictment for "acts of terrorism," the preventive detention was extended to twelve years.
[9]
The
Cossiga
decree-law was passed on 15 December 1979. It prolonged the length of
preventive detention
relative to terrorism suspicions and allowed
wiretaps
. Critics have pointed out that this violated articles 15 and 27 of the Constitution.
[9]
The Cossiga decree-law also created the status of
pentito
(officially "collaborators of justice"): those accused of terrorism crimes and who accepted of
confessing
them and of informing the authorities about their accomplices could be liberated.
Law n°191 of May 21, 1978, called "
Moro law
", and law n°15 of February 6, 1980, were ratifications by the assembly of decrees of emergency enacted by the executive power, respectively on March 28, 1978, and on December 15, 1979.
[10]
United Kingdom
[
edit
]
- Prevention of Terrorism Acts
(Northern Ireland), 1974?89
- Terrorism Act 2000
- Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
(the
Racial and Religious Hatred Act
was supposed to be part of it as provisions, but it was dropped)
- The
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
was intended to deal with the
Law Lords
' ruling of 16 December 2004, that the detention without trial of nine foreigners at
HM Prison
Belmarsh
under Part IV of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was unlawful, being incompatible with the
European Convention on Human Rights
. It was given
Royal assent
on 11 March 2005. The Act allows the
Home Secretary
to impose "
control orders
" on people they suspect of involvement in
terrorism
, which in some cases may derogate (opt out) from
human rights
laws. In April 2006, a High Court judge issued a declaration that section 3 of the Act was incompatible with the right to a fair trial under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act was described by
Mr Justice Sullivan
as an 'affront to justice'.
Amnesty International
,
Human Rights Watch
,
JUSTICE
and
Liberty
have opposed it. Criticism of the Act included complaints about the range of restrictions that could be imposed, the use of closed proceedings and special advocates to hear secret evidence against the detainee, and the possibility that evidence against detainees may include evidence obtained in other countries by torture.
- The
Terrorism Act 2006
increased the limit of pre-charge detention for terrorist suspects to 28 days after a rebellion by Labour MPs. Originally, the Government, and Prime Minister Tony Blair, had pushed for a 90-day detention period, but this was reduced to 28 days after a vote in the House of Commons. Home Office Minister Damian Green announced on 20 January 2011 that the period would revert to 14 days as the order extending the period to 28 days would be allowed to lapse at midnight on 24 January.
- The
Counter-Terrorism Act 2008
, a section of which would have controversially increased the limit of pre-charge detention for terrorism suspects for 42 days. This measure was dropped from the bill after it failed to win approval in the House of Lords.
[11]
- Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010
, which led to the
- Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010
- Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011
received royal assent on 14 December that year.
- Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015
UK anti-terrorism legislation is subject to regular review by the
Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
.
Anti-terrorism legislation in common law countries (other than the UK)
[
edit
]
Australia
[
edit
]
The Civil Rights Network opposes such legislation.
Elizabeth Evatt
, a federal judge, has criticized
John Howard
's 2005 anti-terrorism bill, particularly provisions relating to control orders and preventive detention, saying that "These laws are striking at the most fundamental freedoms in our democracy in a most draconian way."
[12]
Bangladesh
[
edit
]
Canada
[
edit
]
India
[
edit
]
New Zealand
[
edit
]
Pakistan
[
edit
]
- Suppression of Terrorist Activities Ordinance, 1975 enacted by
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
.
[17]
The law remained in force in the
Sindh
Province and the
Punjab
Province until its repeal in 1997,
[17]
and remained the law in the
North West Frontier Province
(NWFP) and
Baluchistan
until August 2001.
[17]
- 1997 Anti-Terrorism Act, signed on August 17, 1997, by then Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif
.
[18]
[19]
The law, which included a broad definition of "terrorism", was enacted after a January 1997 bombing by Mehram Ali, a member of the
Shia
militant organization
Tehrik Nifaz Fiqh-i-Jafaria
(TNFJ).
[17]
The Anti-Terrorism Act created specials
Anti-Terrorism Courts
(ATC) as well as an Anti-Terrorism Appellate (ATA) Tribunal.
[17]
Merham Ali was subsequently tried before those special courts, but made an appeal to the
Supreme Court
, which confirmed his death sentence, but declared most of the 1997 Anti-Terrorism Act
unconstitutional
.
[17]
- 24 October 1998 Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance issued by Nawaz Sharif's government to respond to most of the Supreme Court's objections.
[17]
According to political scientist Charles H. Kennedy, "Special Anti-Terrorism courts remained in place but the judges of such courts were granted tenure of office (two years, later extended to two and one-half years); the special Appellate Tribunals were disbanded, appeals against the decisions of the Anti-Terrorism courts would henceforth be to the respective High Courts; and restrictions were placed on the earlier act's provisions regarding
trial
in absentia
to accord with regular legal procedures."
[17]
- Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of Civil Power) Ordinance
, 1998.
[17]
Applying itself to the
Sindh Province
, the ordinance granted broad judicial powers to the military.
[17]
It also created the new crime of "civil commotion,"
[17]
which exposed to a penalty of 7 firm prison years. The ordinance defined "civil commotion" as
"creation of internal disturbances in violation of law or intended to violate law, commencement or continuation of
illegal strikes
,
go-slows
,
lock-outs
, vehicle snatching/lifting, damage to or destruction of State or private property, random firing to create panic, charging
bhatha
[protection money/extortion], acts of criminal trespass, distributing, publishing or pasting of a handbill or making
graffiti
or wall-chalking intended to create unrest or fear or create a threat to the security of law and order..."
[17]
- 30 January 1999: the Pakistan Armed Forces Ordinance of 1998 is extended to the whole country.
[17]
It was also amended to enable "absconders" from justice to be tried in absentia by any military court.
[17]
The opposition filed many constitutional petitions challenging the validity of the ordinance, resulting in
Liaquat Hussain versus Federation of Pakistan
issued on 22 February 1999. The Supreme Court declared the ordinance "unconstitutional, without legal authority, and with no legal effect.".
[17]
It rejected Nawaz Sharif's claim that the ordinance was temporary and limited to Sindh Province.
[17]
- 27 April 1999: repeal of the Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of Civil Power) ordinance. However, "civil commotion" is included as a crime under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997.
[17]
- 27 August 1999: amendment to the Anti-Terrorism Act, authorizing
ATC
(Anti Terrorism Court) in all of the country.
[17]
Russia
[
edit
]
In 2017
Ukraine
opened a case against Russia for involvement and financing of
military-occupied
Autonomous Republic of Crimea
and part of
Donbas
.
[20]
South Africa
[
edit
]
United States
[
edit
]
Federal
[
edit
]
- Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989
- Executive Order 12947
signed by President Bill Clinton Jan. 23, 1995, Prohibiting Transactions With Terrorists Who Threaten To Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process, and later expanded to include freezing the assets of
Osama bin Laden
and others.
- Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995
- US
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
(see also the
LaGrand case
which opposed in 1999-2001 Germany to the US in the
International Court of Justice
concerning a German citizen convicted of armed robbery and murder, and
sentenced to death
)
- Executive Order 13224
, signed by President George W. Bush Sept. 23, 2001, among other things, authorizes the seizure of assets of organizations or individuals designated by the Secretary of the Treasury to assist, sponsor, or provide material or financial support or who are otherwise associated with terrorists. 66 Fed. Reg. 49,079 (Sept. 23, 2001).
- 2001 Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools for Intercepting and Obstructing Terrorism Act (USA
Patriot Act
)(amended March 2006) (the
Financial Anti-Terrorism Act
was integrated to it)
- Homeland Security Act
of 2002, Pub. L. 107?296.
- Border Protection, Anti-terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005
- Real ID Act
of 2005
- Military Commissions Act of 2006
- Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act
of 2006
Ohio
[
edit
]
Anti-terrorism legislation in civil law countries (outside the European Union)
[
edit
]
China
[
edit
]
China passed Anti-terrorism Law on December 27, 2015.
[24]
The Anti-terrorism Law has 10 chapters and 97 articles, taking effect on January 1, 2016. Before the promulgation of Anti-terrorism Law, though anti-terrorism laws can be found in the Criminal Law or some other emergency action regulations, there was not a systematic legal structure or source for anti-terrorism actions.
The most controversial provisions of the Anti-terrorism Law are the numerous new restrictions on the operation of internet and technology based companies, among which Article 21 says that an internet operator or provider is obligated to verify the identity of each user and shall refuse to provide services to a user who refuses such verification or fails to provide a clear identity. Any company who fails to meet such obligation may face fines, orders of rectification and its management and executives may face fines and even detentions from 5 to 15 days. In addition, Article 18 says any telecommunication operator or internet provider shall provide technology access and source code or other de-encryption support and assistance for the purposes of preventing and investigating terrorism by Public Safety Department or National Security Department.
Chile
[
edit
]
Human Rights Watch has criticized the Chilean government for inappropriately using anti-terrorist legislation against
Mapuche
groups involved in land conflicts. While the legislation in question was originally enacted by the Pinochet dictatorship, the democratic governments that have followed have actually increased its severity.
[
citation needed
]
Human Rights Watch has expressed special concern that the current version of the law lists arson as a "terrorist" offence. This has allowed the application of the law against Mapuche vandals. While recognizing that crimes have certainly been committed, the international organization believes that they are not comparable to terrorist acts.
[25]
In 2018, Amnesty International urged Chile to stop utilizing the
Anti-Terrorism Law
[
es
]
to prosecute Mapuche dissidents affirmed all people's
right to a fair trial
.
[26]
El Salvador
[
edit
]
El Salvador
, presided by
Antonio Saca
of the right-wing
ARENA
party, had adopted in September 2006 an anti-terrorist law. All major parties, including the
FMLN
, have criticized the law, claiming it could be used against social movements
[27]
The government first attempted to use the law against illegal street vendors who violently resisted removal by the police. These charges did not result in convictions.
In July 2007, the Salvadoran government charged fourteen people with acts of terrorism for their participation and/or association with a demonstration against privatization of the nation's water system. Charges were dismissed against one of those arrested. The remainder, known as the Suchitito 13, were released, but continued to face charges under the Special Law Against Terrorist Acts.
[28]
[29]
The charges were reduced to "disorderly conduct" in early February 2008 and then completely dropped later in the month.
Israel
[
edit
]
Many years Israel has relied on mandatory regulations as a legal basis for fighting terrorism and for convicting terrorists both in civilian and military courts. In 2016, after a long and thorough work by the
Minister of Justice
Ayelet Shaked
, the
Knesset
passed a comprehensive law against terrorism, forbidding any kind of terrorism and support of terrorism, and setting severe punishments for terrorists. The law also regulates legal efforts against terrorism.
[30]
Peru
[
edit
]
Peru adopted anti-terrorist laws in 1992, under
Alberto Fujimori
's presidency. The laws were criticized by Amnesty International, who declared in its 2002 report that "Detainees falsely charged with 'terrorism-related' offences in previous years remained held. 'Anti-terrorism' legislation which had resulted in unfair trials since its introduction in 1992 remained in force. Members of the security forces accused of human rights violations continued to have their cases transferred to military courts."
[31]
Lori Berenson
, a US citizen serving a 20-year prison term in Peru, has been condemned in virtue of these laws, on charges of collaboration with the
Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement
.
Philippines
[
edit
]
The
Human Security Act
of 2007, signed into law by President
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
and effective since July 2007, officially aimed at tackling militants in the southern Philippines, including the
Abu Sayyaf
group, which has links to
al-Qaeda
and has been blamed for bombings and kidnappings in the region.
[32]
Under the law, three days of warrantless detention are authorized,
[32]
although arresting officers are obliged to immediately inform a judge about the arrest.
[32]
Furthermore, detained terrorists are entitled to see a lawyer, a priest, a doctor, or family members.
[32]
The law allows eavesdropping on suspects
[33]
as well as access to bank accounts for authorities.
[32]
Convictions could result in 40-year prison sentences, but compensations are provided for in case of
miscarriage of justice
.
[32]
[33]
Terrorism was defined by Section 3 as "sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand",
[33]
a formulation criticized by Wilson Fortaleza, national president and third nominee of the labor party-list group
Sanlakas
, who claimed the law could be used to crush political dissent.
[33]
Indonesia
[
edit
]
Following the October
2002 Bali bombings
,
Indonesia
adopted Government Regulation in Lieu of Law 1/2002. Under the Indonesian legal system, a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law has the same power as a parliament-enacted legislation, except that it can only be issued under emergency circumstances and is subject to review by the next parliamentary session. Nevertheless, Indonesian Parliament enacted this emergency regulation into Law 15/2003. As since, Indonesia has an anti-terror legislation with strong political support. The Anti-Terror Law cultivates many criticism, however. The Law contained provisions which can circumvent normal criminal proceeding such as quick and long detention. One of the main contentious provision of the Law is that it allows Intelligence Information to be used as a preliminary evidence that can be used for apprehending a suspect. The role of Intelligence Information as evidence has been a subject of hot debate in Indonesia.
[34]
Turkey
[
edit
]
Article 8 of the
Anti-Terror Law
(Law 3713; April 1991), slightly amended in 1995 and later repealed,
[35]
imposed three-year prison sentences for "separatist propaganda." Despite its name, the Anti-Terror Law punished many non-violent offences.
[36]
Pacifists have been imprisoned under Article 8. For example, publisher Fatih Tas was prosecuted in 2002 under Article 8 at Istanbul
State Security Court
for translating and publishing writings by
Noam Chomsky
, summarizing the history of the
human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey
; he was acquitted, however, in February 2002.
[36]
State Security Courts were transformed into Heavy Penal Courts following June 2004 reforms to the 1982
Constitution
, enacted following the
1980 military coup
.
As of 2008, detainees arrested under the Anti-Terror Law have access to lawyers at the very beginning of their detention.
[37]
Ukraine
[
edit
]
In 2017
Ukraine
opened a case against Russia for involvement and financing of
military occupied
Autonomous Republic of Crimea
and part of
Donbas
.
[20]
Anti Terrorist Act, 2009 passed in Bangladesh
[
edit
]
This act is effective from 11 June 2008. Under section 28 of this Act, anti terrorist special Tribunal is trying the crimes.
[
citation needed
]
See also
[
edit
]
References
[
edit
]
- ^
See Lyal S. Sunga,
The Emerging System of International Criminal Law: Developments in Codification and Implementation
(Brill Publishers, 1997) pp. 191-203.
- ^
International instruments to counter terrorism
,
United Nations
- ^
"ETS no. 090 - European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism"
. Council of Europe. 27 January 1977
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
"ETS No. 190 - Protocol amending the European Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism"
. Council of Europe. 27 January 1977
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
"Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No. 196)"
. Council of Europe. 16 May 2005.
Archived
from the original on 7 August 2008
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
"國民保護와 公共安全을 위한 테러防止法"
. Retrieved
25 November
2019
.
- ^
"Help From France Key In Covert Operations"
.
The Washington Post
.
ISSN
0190-8286
. Retrieved
19 January
2022
.
- ^
a
b
"Safety & Security: Terrorism"
. The Department of Justice and Equality, Republic of Ireland
. Retrieved
3 June
2014
.
- ^
a
b
c
Schimel, Anne (1 April 1998).
"Justice ≪ de plomb ≫ en Italie"
.
Le Monde diplomatique
(in French)
. Retrieved
19 January
2022
.
- ^
"Paroledonnee"
. 12 April 2021. Archived from the original on 8 October 2002
. Retrieved
19 January
2022
.
{{
cite web
}}
: CS1 maint: unfit URL (
link
)
- ^
Dominic Casciani (24 January 2008).
"Terror bill: Key elements"
.
BBC News
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
Michael Pelly, Tony Stephens and Marian Wilkinson (25 October 2005).
"Former leaders call for debate"
.
Sydney Morning Herald
.
Archived
from the original on 11 September 2006
. Retrieved
11 August
2006
.
- ^
"Bangladesh Anti-Terrorism Act, 2009"
.
- ^
Radia, Andy (19 April 2013).
"Harper government to fast track anti-terrorism bill"
.
Canada Politics
.
Yahoo! Canada
. Retrieved
22 April
2013
.
- ^
Branch, Legislative Services (15 November 2019).
"Consolidated federal laws of canada, Anti-terrorism Act, 2015"
.
laws-lois.justice.gc.ca
. Retrieved
17 March
2022
.
- ^
Kalhan, Anil; et al. (2006).
Colonial Continuities: Human Rights, Antiterrorism, and Security Laws in India
. 20 Colum. J. Asian L. 93.
SSRN
970503
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
Kennedy, Charles H. (2004).
"The Creation and Development of Pakistan's Anti-terrorism Regime, 1997?2002"
(PDF)
. In Limaye, Satu P.; Wirsing, Robert G.; Malik, Mohan (eds.).
Religious Radicalism and Security in South Asia
(PDF)
. Honolulu, Hawai, Spring:
Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies
. pp. 387?413.
- ^
"The Anti Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997"
.
Pakistan's
Federal Investigative Agency
's website
. Archived from
the original
on 14 February 2012
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
Ortega, Kellie (2002).
"Anti-terrorist laws in Pakistan"
.
Seminar Magazine
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
a
b
Oliphant, Roland (6 March 2017).
"Ukraine sues Russia in International Court of Justice for 'financing terrorism' and discrimination"
.
Telegraph
.
Telegraph Media Group Limited
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
"Part 4"
.
static.pmg.org.za
. Retrieved
18 January
2022
.
- ^
Parliament of the Republic of South Africa.
"Anti-Terrorism Bill"
(PDF)
. Retrieved
18 January
2022
.
- ^
South African Police Service.
"PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY AGAINST TERRORIST AND RELATED ACTIVITIES ACT 33 OF 2004"
(PDF)
.
- ^
Shaohui, Tian, ed. (27 December 2015).
"Commentary: China's anti-terrorism legislation no excuse for U.S. agitation"
.
Xinhuanet
. Archived from
the original
on 6 June 2017
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
"Undue Process: Terrorism Trials, Military Courts and the Mapuche in Southern Chile"
(PDF)
.
Human Rights Watch
.
16
(5): 63. October 2004
. Retrieved
28 August
2008
.
- ^
"Chile: Authorities must stop criminalizing Indigenous Mapuche people under the Anti-Terrorism Law"
. Amnesty International. 28 May 2018.
- ^
"Fighting Terrorism"
.
Latin America Monitor
. Business Monitor International Ltd. October 2006. Archived from
the original
on 22 February 2007
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
"El Salvador: Amnesty International Criticizes El Salvador for Using Anti-Terrorism Laws to Punish Social Protesters"
.
Amnesty International USA
. 18 July 2007. Archived from
the original
on 10 November 2008
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
"Democracia Azul: Access to Water as a Human Right in El Salvador"
.
Center for International Policy
. 18 January 2008
. Retrieved
29 August
2008
.
- ^
"Terror bill passes into law"
.
The Jerusalem Post
.
The Jerusalem Post
. 16 June 2016
. Retrieved
16 June
2016
.
- ^
Toledo, Alejandro
(December 2002).
"2002 Report on Peru"
.
Amnesty International
. Archived from
the original
on 17 March 2007
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
"Philippines approves terror bill"
. 20 February 2007
. Retrieved
19 January
2022
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Romero, Paolo.
'No haven for terror in RP'
,
ABS News
, March 7, 2007
- ^
Movanet.
"Rewriting the antiterror law"
. Retrieved
19 January
2022
.
- ^
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
(22 June 2004).
"Implementation of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights by Turkey"
.
Council of Europe
. No. Resolution No 1381
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
a
b
"Questions and Answers: Freedom of Expression and Language Rights in Turkey"
.
Human Rights Watch
. April 2002
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
- ^
"Retrograde Human Rights Trends and Stagnation of the Human Rights Reform Process"
. Retrieved
13 August
2019
.
4th part of the
Human Rights Watch
July 2007 report titled "Turkey: Human Rights Concerns in the Lead up to July Parliamentary Elections.
Further reading
[
edit
]
External links
[
edit
]
|
---|
Main articles
| | |
---|
By ideology
| |
---|
Types and
tactics
| |
---|
State involvement
| |
---|
Organisation
| |
---|
Historical
| |
---|
Lists
| |
---|
Memorials and museums
| |
---|
By country
| |
---|