Commons Sense

Hansard-based summaries and metrics

<-- Back to proposed bills

National Security Bill - Sitting 8 (Afternoon)

19 July 2022

Proposing MP
James Gray Con
North Wiltshire
Type
Public Bill Committee

At a Glance

Issue Summary

The discussion centers on clauses of the National Security Bill concerning the court's role in overseeing measures imposed by the Secretary of State, including provisions for oversight, scrutiny mechanisms, and judicial review standards. The statement discusses key provisions in the National Security Bill related to court oversight of state threat prevention and investigation measures (STPIMs). The statement discusses Clause 39 of the National Security Bill which outlines requirements for consultations between police forces and prosecuting authorities before imposing a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure (TPIM) notice. The statement discusses Clause 40 of the National Security Bill which introduces a review mechanism for Supremacy Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (STPIMs) to ensure their necessity and proportionality.

Action Requested

MPs are seeking clarification from the Minister regarding the standard 'obviously flawed' used to assess the Secretary of State’s decisions, the circumstances under which hearings can proceed without the individual's presence or notification, and the rationale behind allowing courts to discontinue review hearings in unspecified circumstances.

Key Facts

  • Clause 35 sets out court functions and powers regarding applications by the Secretary of State.
  • Subsection (4) allows the court to consider applications without notifying the individual.
  • Subsections (7), (8), and (9) provide powers for the courts in various scenarios.
  • Clause 35 sets out the function and powers of the court to consider whether decisions by the Secretary of State are obviously flawed.
  • The court has never found any decision obviously flawed under similar terrorism prevention measures.
  • Clause 36 allows for urgent cases where STPIMs can be imposed without prior court permission, with safeguards in place.
  • Clause 37 ensures a prompt timeline towards High Court reviews within seven days of notice being served or confirmed.
  • Clause 38 provides for automatic full High Court review in every case imposing STPIMs.
  • Clause 39 requires consultation with police and prosecuting authorities before imposing a TPIM notice.
  • The clause aims to prevent TPIM notices from being imposed when prosecution is possible.
  • The Home Office impact assessment estimates costs ranging from £0.1 million to £1 million per TPIM.
  • Clause 40 places a duty on the Secretary of State to keep under review the ongoing necessity of both the STPIM notice itself and the measures specified in it.
  • The individual will be able to appeal against the decision quarterly.
  • An independent reviewer will ensure correct implementation of clause 40 and the entire STPIM regime.
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy