Embargo: 00.01 hours, Friday, August 15, 2008. Terrorism post 9/11 - emerging critiques (13/08/08)
The government's approach to tackling terrorism in a post 9/11 world is put under critical scrutiny by academics and practitioners in the latest issue of Criminal Justice Matters, the magazine of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London.
The magazine features a wide range of articles examining strategies to counter terrorism. Community versus state solutions are the subject of Abdul Haqq Baker's article. Chairman of the Brixton Mosque and director of the STREET de-radicalisation initiative, he describes how the Brixton Mosque led the way in tackling extremist infiltration and in deradicalising a significant number of individuals who had previously adhered to extremist ideologies. Acknowledgement is now being given, he writes, 'to the fact that some of the most effective counter terrorist measures lie at grassroots levels'. However, he cautions against premature celebration of success. 'Significant seeds have already been sown' and 'existing government foreign policy and its perceived double standards... only serve to exacerbate soil that is already fertile'.
Elsewhere in this issue:
- Robert Lambert of the University of Exeter and former head of the Metropolitan Police Muslim Contact Unit suggests that lessons can be learned from Northern Ireland and the experience of suspect communities. He says `it is misleading and counter-productive to endorse the stereotyping, profiling and conflating of Salafis and Islamists with al-Qaida terrorism'.
- Christina Pantazis and Simon Pemberton of the Centre for the Study of Poverty and Social Justice at the University of Bristol present research highighting the impact of the stereotyping. Anti-terrorism powers are being used extensively and are disproportionately impacting upon minority ethnic groups and, in particular, Muslim communities. They argue that the government has `legitimated its draconian counter-terrorism legislation through the exploitation of a longstanding decline in the popularity of civil liberties, as well as recent terrorist attacks'.
- Professor David Bonner of the University of Leicester argues that the threat from terrorism iinspired by certain interpretations of Islam is not different from or greater than previous threats. But he points out that the Human Rights Act does offer the chance for enhanced scrutiny. He also points to the limits of harsh and punitive sanctions: 'those willing to sacrifice their lives will not be deterred by harsh laws or penalties', he writes. 'But the prospect of execution did not deter previous generations of those willing to use death and destruction to further their political cause'.
- Two victims of terrorism also write about their experiences. John Tulloch, injured in the 7/7 bombings, describes the way in which his image was misused by those seeking tougher penalties, and how he went about challenging this. Jo Berry, whose father Sir Anthony Berry MP was killed in the 1984 Brighton bombing writes about her experiences and her journey towards understanding those who killed her father.
Dr Basia Spalek of the University of Birmingham, the guest editor of this issue, said:
'State responses to terrorism are subject to considerable and growing critique. As countering terrorism becomes mainstreamed into criminal justice policy and practice, the lens of criminological enquiry will increasingly be placed upon terrorism.'
Richard Garside, director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, said:
'Any government needs to take effective steps to safeguard the liberty and security of their citizens. As the articles in this issue of Criminal Justice Matters make clear, toughness is often not a very effective means of ensuring safety and important liberties.'
ends
Contact:
Richard Garside, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, 020 7848 1688 or 07989 474 610
Notes to editors:
- Criminal Justice Matters is the quarterly magazine of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, an independent charity based at King's College. The views expressed in the magazine do not necessarily represent those of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.
- From 2008 CJM is being published in partnership with Routledge, part of the Taylor Francis publishing group. The magazine is edited by Enver Solomon (deputy director) and Rebecca Roberts (senior policy associate) of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies. To view this issue of Criminal Justice Matters, visit the Informaworld website.
- The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies is an independent charity based at King's College London. It was established in 1931 and aims to inform and educate about all aspects of crime and the criminal justice system from an objective standpoint. It encourages and facilitates healthy debate and understanding of the complex nature of issues concerning crime.
- The full list of articles is as follows:
EDITORIAL - Food for thought
Enver Solomon and Helen Mills introduce this issue of cjm.
TOPICAL ISSUES AND COMMENT
`Target practice': sanction detection and the criminalisation of children
Tim Bateman sets out how police targets have led to the criminalisation of greater numbers of children and dispels the myth of a girl crime wave.
The national drug strategy: what progress?
Mike Trace judges the government's record on tackling drug misuse and assesses its new strategy.
What's the alternative?
Jamie Bennett examines penal politics in the UK and highlights a more progressive agenda emerging in Scotland.
THEMED SECTION: TERRORISM
Terrorism: emerging critiques
Basia Spalek introduces the themed section on terrorism and encourages us to take a multi-dimensional approach to understanding violent extremism and how to respond to it.
Trading civil liberties for greater security?: the impact on minority communities
Christina Pantazis and Simon Pemberton highlight the impact of anti-terrorism legislation on minority communities.
Anti-terrorism and police powers: should we be concerned?
Abie Longstaff and John Graham consider the challenge for the police of balancing engagement and enforcement with concerns over the use of anti-terrorism powers for wider purposes.
Terrorism, the ticking bomb, and criminal justice values
Lucia Zedner examines the `ticking bomb' scenario as a way of restraining, rather than licensing, exceptional measures against terrorism.
Have the rules of the game changed?
David Bonner argues the rules of counter-terrorism powers have not changed since 9/11 but judges in the human rights act era have begun to afford such powers enhanced scrutiny.
Ignoring the lessons of the past
Robert Lambert highlights the extent to which previous experiences of terrorism have been discounted by policy makers and opinion formers in the aftermath of 9/11 and 7/7.
A view from the inside
Abdul Haqq Baker provides an account of the Brixton Mosque and the shifting perceptions towards it, since it was founded.
Causes of jihadi terrorism: beyond paintballing and social exclusion
Johnathan Githens-Mazer argues popular explanatory accounts of islamic terrorism have failed to take account of the experiences of radicalised Muslims and the local and historical injustices immigrant groups face.
Torture as a response to the `war on terror' in America and Turkey
Michael Flynn reflects on the acceptance of torturing suspected terrorists in America and Turkey.
The sweatshops of penality: Guantanamo, renditions and economic change
Vincenzo Scalia argues the production of penality in Guantanamo Bay and the system of renditions reflects wider transformations.
Becoming iconic
John Tulloch reflects on his experience engaging with the media as a victim of the 7/7 bombings.
Building bridges for peace
Jo Berry describes her `journey in understanding' following the killing of her father by the IRA.
Researching and understanding terrorism: a role for criminology?
Pete Fussey and Anthony Richards outline the development of terrorism studies as an academic discipline and consider what criminological approaches may have to offer understanding terrorism.
IN FOCUS
The probation spending crisis
Mark Oldfield and Roger Grimshaw argue that increased probation funding has failed to match the costs of delivering services.
DIGEST
Anna Gilmour provides a digest of recent research and policy developments.
| [Previous] | [Next] |