Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Home Office
Baroness May of Maidenhead
Main Page: Baroness May of Maidenhead (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness May of Maidenhead's debates with the Home Office
Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures
Baroness May of Maidenhead Excerpts(10 years ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mrs Theresa May)
Section 19(1) of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (the Act) requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of every relevant three-month period on the exercise of her TPIM powers under the Act during that period.
The level of information provided will always be subject to slight variations based on operational advice.
TPIM notices in force (as of 30 November 2014) | 1 |
TPIM notices in respect of British citizens (as of 30 November 2014) | 0 |
TPIM notices extended (during the reporting period) | 1 |
TPIM notices revoked (during the reporting period) | 0 |
TPIM notices revived (during the reporting period) | 0 |
Variations made to measures specified in TPIM notices (during the reporting period) | 1 |
Applications to vary measures specified in TPIM notices refused (during the reporting period) | 2 |
During the reporting period one TPIM notice has been extended.
The TPIM review group (TRG) keeps every TPIM notice under regular and formal review. The next TRG will take place in December.
Section 16 of the 2011 Act provides rights of appeal in relation to decisions taken by the Secretary of State under the Act. One appeal was lodged under section 16 during the reporting period.
One judgment was handed down by the High Court in relation to an appeal under section 16 of the Act. In DD v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 3820 (Admin), handed down on 20 November 2014, the High Court dismissed a preliminary issue in DD’s appeal against the revival of his TPIM notice. This preliminary issue related to DD’s submission that the revival of the TPIM notice breached article 3 ECHR. The remainder of the appeal will be heard in March 2015. This judgment is available at http://www. bailii.org/