It is commonly believed that, in the police practices of arrest without judicial warrant and detention without charge, England and Turkey stand at opposite ends of the compliance spectrum among nations signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights. This is the first book to examine the extent to which such belief is warranted. Beginning with a detailed comparison of the arrest and detention standards set by the Convention and the corresponding provisions of Turkish and English law, the author then proceeds to investigate actual police practice in both countries. He reviews and analyzes the existing research in England and Wales on how the status of suspects in practice compares with the status of suspects in law. To determine this in Turkey, where no such research existed before this book, he offers the results of his own field work in 21 Turkish police stations and three gendarmeries in various cities and towns, as well as in two Turkish anti-terrorist departments. This is the first publication of any research into how Turkish police apply law to practice. He goes on to examine the adequacy and effectiveness of remedies in both countries, and to make recommendations, not only for reform in England and Turkey, but to the Convention organs with respect to gaps and weaknesses in their case law. For criminal justice and law enforcement authorities, this is a valuable guide to ensuring compliance with the extensive and developed standards established by the case law of the Convention, and to handling allegations of breaches of the Convention by the police. In addition, Arrest and Detention Powers in Turkish and English Law and Practice in the Light of the European Convention on Human Rights is a penetrating analysis of `law in books' versus `law in action', and as such has relevance to anyone concerned with the enforcement of human rights law.

In a regional, national and global response to terrorism, the emphasis necessarily lies on preventing the next terrorist act. Yet, with prevention comes prediction: the need to identify and detain those considered likely to engage in a terrorist act in the future. The detention of ‘suspected terrorists’ is intended, therefore, to thwart a potential terrorist act recognising that retrospective action is of no consequence given the severity of terrorist crime. Although preventative steps against those reasonably suspected to have an intention to commit a terrorist act is sound counter-terrorism policy, a law allowing arbitrary arrest and detention is not. A State must carefully enact anti-terrorism laws to ensure that preventative detention does not wrongly accuse and grossly slander an innocent person, nor allow a terrorist to evade detection. This book examines whether the preventative detention of suspected terrorists in State counter-terrorism policy is consistent with the prohibitions on arbitrary arrest and detention in international human rights law. This examination is based on the ‘principle of proportionality’; a principle underlying the prohibition on arbitrary arrest as universally protected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and given effect to internationally in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and regionally in regional instruments including the European Convention on Human Rights. The book is written from a global counter-terrorism perspective, drawing particularly on examples of preventative detention from the UK, US and Australia, as well as jurisprudence from the ECHR.

The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on discrimination under the Convention is typically considered to be unclear and conflicting. Against that background, new possibilities for more effective protection against discrimination are opening up through recent developments in the case-law on Article 14 and with the advent of the new Protocol 12 to the Convention. This study demonstrates that the 'objective and reasonable justification' test and convenional treatment of non-discrimination are not apt for dealing with these emerging new possibilities or for explaining the variations in existing case-law. It therefore suggests a new approach to dealing with protection against discrimination under the Convention, developed by focusing on variations in the strictness of objective justification review. This study proposes a more viable framework for understanding discrimination analysis under the Convention which includes an alternative interpretation of the burden of proof under Article 14 and a three-tiered model of factors that influences the strictness of review.

Human rights in the external relations of the EU may manifest itself in different manners; one of them is the conditionality policy that the EU applies to third countries. This study intends to explore the modalities of this conditionality policy, as well as its nature and reach. It also analyzes how the policy could be improved and be made more coherent and effective. The point of departure is the division made between two modes of conditionality: ex ante and ex post. In the first case the EU issues conditions, which must be fulfilled before the negotiation or conclusion of a given agreement or an action with a view to strengthening the relations. The second case, conditionality ex post , is when conditions are allready part of an agreement or an established relation. The so-called human rights clause, or democratic clause, incarnates the second modality. This study explores both types of conditionality, but puts a special emphasis on the second, given its legal nature, its reciprocity, and its systematic inclusion in all framework agreements. It is argued here that this clause could represent the basis of a fully-fledged human rights policy of EU. At present, however, the implementation of the clause has been fragmentary. The interpretation that has prevailed (the human rights clause being a mechanism of exclusively punitive nature), has constituted an obstacle for its implementation. In addition, the clause has been activated only as a response to breaches of democratic principles (and not human rights) in the ACP countries ( and not other regions). The human rights clause has been the victim of the 'sectorial approaches' where policy choices were determined by the instrument at issue. It is about time for the EU to revisit the interpretation of the clause in order to make of it a dynamic instrument, integrated in a global and coherent external human rights policy.

This book vividly describes the historical background, current issues, and remaining challenges of Turkey's security sector institutions and their democratic oversight. As Turkey proceeds on its path towards possible European Union membership, this book documents its progress on the touchstone issue of contemporary civil-military relations, the challenging issue of instituting civilian and democratic oversight and control mechanisms over a whole array of security institutions including the police, gendarmerie, army, intelligence services and many others. Military relations in Turkey have undergone great and constructive changes during the past few years, which, if continued, will also have a positive impact on the accession negotiations with the European Union. In this context it will be very important, building on the goodwill which the Turkish military possess in society, to develop an informed security community consisting of members of parliament, academicians, journalists underpinning of security policy.

Are human rights gaining or losing ground? This question has become relevant after two decades of unprecedented progress in developing human rights standards and institutions. The political climate during the Cold War created many obstacles, but the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and its aftermath during the following decade created a sense of promise and progress among human rights scholars and actors. Yet, today, actions, statements and initiatives questioning the legitimacy and validity of human rights, or even threatening their very existence, have become a regular part of current political realities, even in states traditionally dedicated to the rule of law. This would have been inconceivable ten or twenty years ago. At the political level human rights are gaining as well as losing ground. The question of the adequacy, legitimacy and scope of human rights is still a live one. And weaknesses in supra-national human rights protection systems have emerged over the last twenty years. It is now clear that human rights mechanisms are not well adapted to the handling of the ever-increasing number of complaints or to the effective implementation of human rights. This thought-provoking collection of essays by leading scholars and practitioners in the field of human rights explores the ways in which human rights are currently being challenged and weakened, but also strengthened in important and groundbreaking ways in different areas and settings. They explore the many current debates which centre on human rights concerns: debates about secularism and religious norms, about minimum social standards and social security, about the future regulation of citizenship, about prison reform and the use of less inhumane methods of detention; as well as the reform of the UN system and the challenges facing the now overburdened European Court of Human Rights.

This book uses comparative law and comparative international law approaches to explore the role of human rights ombuds, classic-based ombuds and other types of ombuds institutions in human rights protection and promotion, their methods of application of international and domestic human rights law and their roles in strengthening good governance. It highlights the increasing importance of national human rights ombuds institutions globally and their roles as national human rights institutions (NHRIs). Chapters address: ombuds institutions as mechanisms to strengthen democratic, horizontal and vertical accountability, the rule of law and good governance; national human rights ombuds institutions as NHRIs; the investigatory, litigation, promotional and other powers of human rights and classic-based ombuds and their methods for applying international and domestic human rights law; ombuds institutions and the protection and promotion of international children's rights; national human rights ombuds additional mandates as OPCAT national preventive mechanisms, UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Article 33(2) framework mechanisms and EU national equality bodies; human rights ombuds and business and human rights; ombuds institutions, gender and women's rights; the European Ombudsman and human rights; national human rights ombuds and other ombuds models by region, accompanied by case studies on national human rights ombuds; and the legal and extra-legal factors affecting ombuds institutional effectiveness.