Preventive Policing, Surveillance, and European Counter-Terrorism

摘要

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1 [Research for this paper was partly supported by the FP7 programme of the European Commission through the DETECTER project under the Security Call, Grant number 217862.] The European Union Counter-Terrorism Strategy: Prevent, Protect, Pursue, Respond (Brussels; December 1, 2005), available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/jha/87257.pdf. 2 P. De Koster, Terrorism: Special Investigation Techniques (Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2005). 3 Council of Europe, Recommendation Rec (2005)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on “special investigation techniques” in relation to serious crimes including acts of terrorism. (Brussels, April 20, 2005), available at: http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/legal_co-operation/fight_against_terrorism/2_adopted_texts/rec_2005_10E.pdf 4 For a definition of the related concept of proactive policing, see J. Pradel, De l'enquete penale proactive: suggestions pour un statut legal (Paris: Dalloz, 1998), 57. 5 For a survey of requirements in different jurisdictions, see De Koster, pt. 2. 6 The Convention signed at Prum, Germany on May 27, 2005 by Spain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Luxembourg covering information sharing in counter-terrorism. Convention between the Kingdom of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Austria on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation particularly in combating terrorism, cross-border crime and illegal migration, Prüm (Germany), May 27, 2005, Council Secretariat, Brussels, 7 July 2005, 10900/05, available at: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/05/st10/st10900.en05.pdf. 7 Council of Europe, Recommendation Rec (2005)10 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on “special investigation techniques” in relation to serious crimes including acts of terrorism (Brussels, April 20, 2005). 8 For a full discussion, see Maren Raguse, Legal Evaluation Report of the EU Preparatory Action in Security Research. PRISE project (2008), available at: http://www.prise.oeaw.ac.at/docs/PRISE_D3.2_Legal_Evaluation_Report.pdf. For an aging, but still useful, general survey of the understanding of privacy in Anglo-American jurisprudence, see Ruth Gavison, “Privacy and the Limits of the Law,” Yale Law Journal 89 (1980): 421–70 9 I admit that this formulation is unfair to some forms of terrorism. IRA attacks, for example, were often preceded by warnings to the police intended to produce evacuations of civilians. This practice seems to have been motivated by a norm of sparing non-combatants. So it is too much to say that all terrorism is indiscriminate. Similar qualifications are probably needed elsewhere in my nine points about terrorism, as my colleague, John Guelke, has pointed out to me. I do not think these qualifications undercut the main claim that terrorism is a special kind of affront to liberal democracy, and not only a threat to life. 10 For a complementary line of thought, see Michael Walzer, “Terrorism: A Critique of Excuses,” in Arguing About War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 54–66. 11 “Islamist terrorism” is one of five classifications of terrorist threats used by Europol: Islamist terrorism Islamist terrorism is motivated either in whole or in part by an abusive interpretation of Islam; the use of violence is regarded by its practitioners as a divine duty or sacramental act. Ethno-nationalist and separatist terrorist groups Ethno-nationalist and separatist terrorist groups seek international recognition and political self-determination. They are motivated by nationalism, ethnicity and/or religion. Left-wing terrorist groups Left-wing terrorist groups seek to change the entire political, social and economic system of a state according to an extremist leftist model. Their ideology is often Marxist–Le