Our work is only possible through the generosity of private philanthropy. Find out how you can support our mission and can contribute to our work.
Join the HJS mailing list and keep up to date.
New report uncovers why not all terror suspects can be prosecuted
The Presumption of Innocence, by Henry Jackson Society Research Fellow Robin Simcox, looks at the variety of reasons why the state has not always been able to try terror suspects.
The main finding of the report is that, in an era of mass casualty terrorism, the notion that all such individuals can be tried in court is outdated The report demonstrates how prosecutions are just one aspect of a much broader strategy of stopping terrorism and not always necessary in order to prove the existence of a specific threat.
The report goes on to call on Western governments – particularly those in Europe – to be clearer in explaining exactly why the state is forced to apply a broad series of measures in combating international terrorism.
Partially based on field research undertaken at Guantanamo Bay, the report also argues that:
The Presumption of Innocence author, Robin Simcox, said:
“The post-9/11 era has seen some governments take a much more aggressive approach towards terrorism, and use a variety of different tactics to disrupt it. Yet while there is a general recognition at state level that not all terrorist threats can be dealt with in court, these have not been explained well enough to the general public. This must change.”
For more information on the findings of this report, please contact author Robin Simcox at 020 7340 4520 or email@example.com