PREFACE The Advisory Council of Jurists (‘the Advisory Council’) is acutely conscious of national and international security concerns about the threat of terrorism and the resulting proliferation of many national counter-terrorism laws. A realistic approach in tackling these concerns demands that a balance be struck between security concerns and human rights. Today’s challenge is to maintain the rule of law, (particularly safeguards against abuse of power), and the commitment of the international community to human rights, (including the fundamental rights which preserve human dignity), while also preserving the capacity to respond to national and international security concerns. There are many human rights instruments and standards relevant to these issues which came into being before the current global pre-occupation with terrorism. Are those standards too high? Are they still relevant today? Do they expect too much, and do they impose too many burdens on those who wish to counter terrorism? The Advisory Council considers that those human rights instruments and standards remain vitally relevant today. They were designed to be interpreted in an evolving context. They are flexible enough to respond to terrorism within the framework of international law. The UN Security Council confirms that States, when enacting and implementing anti-terrorist legislation, must do so consistently with human rights instruments and standards: States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law and should adopt such measures in accordance with international law in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.2 Indeed, the UN Secretary-General has observed that human rights along with democracy and social justice will, in the long-term, be one of the best prophylactics against terrorism.3 2 Security Council Resolution 1456, High Level Meeting of the Security Council: Combating Terrorism, 20 January 2003; S/RES/1456 (2003). 3 Statement to the Security Council Meeting on Counter Terrorism, 18 January 2002, S/PV.4453 on threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts. The UN General Assembly has made similar points – see A/RES/40/61, 108th plenary meeting (9 December 1985). The Advisory Council also notes the comments of the ASEAN Secretary General Ong Keng Young at the inaugural Asia-Pacific Homeland Security Summit of 20 November 2003 where he refers to the necessity to address social and economic rights in the fight against terrorism: “But we all know that terrorism cannot be eliminated through military and police action alone…Deep-seated resentment arising from social inequality, poverty and lack of opportunities serves as fuel to terrorist inclinations. This is why we strongly believe that a prosperous ASEAN made possible through greater productivity and economic integration is the most effective long-term measure against the dangers of terrorism.” 9