The Joint Committee on Human Rights accepts the need for a counter-terrorism power to stop, question and search travellers at ports and airports without reasonable suspicion, but calls for a reasonable suspicion threshold to be introduced for the more intrusive powers such as detention, searching and copying the contents of personal electronic devices like mobile phones and laptops, and taking biometric samples. The Committee welcomes the improvements made to the powers in Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to stop, question, search and detain at ports, but still considers that a number of significant human rights compatibility concerns remain with those powers even after the changes have been made. The Committee recommends a number of other amendments to the Bill with regards to preventive measures against anti-social behaviour. Whilst cautiously welcoming the Bill's provision to criminalise forced marriage, the Committee believes the new law must be implemented and monitored carefully to ensure that it is not counter-productive for victims. The Committee also recommends additional measures to protect against the potential for prolonged retention of DNA and other personal samples in criminal investigations.

The report The Implications For Access To Justice Of The Government's Proposals To Reform Legal Aid (HL100, HC 766) concludes that the government should reconsider its proposals for the reform of legal aid. The government has so far made welcome exemptions to its proposed residence test in the light of responses to its consultation, but the Committee is still not satisfied that the proposed test will not affect vulnerable groups. While accepting that it is legitimate for the government to introduce a residence test for civil legal aid and to restrict the scope of prison law funding, the Committee calls for more and broader exemptions from these proposals to avoid breaches of the fundamental right of effective access to justice in individual cases. The exceptional funding framework may not be working as intended and could therefore leave certain groups unable to access legal aid when human rights law requires it. The proposal to remove cases with

This report welcomes the Bill's potentially human rights enhancing objectives of taking measures to protect the public from crime, at the same time as focusing on rehabilitation and extending positive support to those vulnerable people who receive short-term prison sentences. However, it remains concerned that insufficient information was provided by the Government (i) to demonstrate the compatibility of the provisions of the Bill with relevant international standards other than the ECHR and (ii) to support its assertion that the proposals have been considered fully in line with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010. The Committee calls on the Government to publish the information which demonstrates this without delay. The Committee welcomes the Government's assurance that private providers of probation services are obliged to act compatibly with human rights law but recommends that there should be statutory provision in the Bill setting out the providers' duties. The Committee calls on the Government to develop clear guidance on the human rights obligations of private probation providers, and to set out how it will monitor the performance of the contracted providers in this regard

The Joint Committee on Human Rights accepts that the measures in the Immigration Bill serve the legitimate aim of immigration control, but is concerned that some of them may be applied in practice in a way which breaches human rights in particular cases. The Committee is particularly concerned about the risk of the new provisions relating to residential tenancies giving rise in practice to homelessness in the case of people who have no right to remain in the UK but face genuine barriers to leaving. The Committee is also concerned to ensure that these measures do not give rise to an undue risk that migrant children will be exposed to homelessness or separation from family members. The provisions in the Bill on access to residential tenancies may heighten the risk of racial discrimination against prospective tenants, notwithstanding the fact that such discrimination is unlawful under the Equality Act. The First Tier Tribunal, not the Secretary of State, should decide whether it is within

While it accepts that there may be a pressing need to reform non-party campaigning, the report Legislative Scrutiny: Transparency Of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning And Trade Union Administration Bill (HL 61, HC 755) calls on the Government to pause the passage of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill to allow for further scrutiny and for further consultation with the Electoral Commission, the Commission on Civil Society and Democratic Engagement and relevant stakeholders. The report recommends that there be more careful consideration of the potential impact on campaigners' rights to free speech and freedom of association. The Committee welcomes the Government improvements made to Part 2 during its passage though the Commons, but suggest that concerns remain. The Joint Committee express concerns regarding: the lack of clarity about the practical effects of the provision in this Part of t

The Joint Committee on Human Rights accepts that the measures in the Immigration Bill serve the legitimate aim of immigration control, but is concerned that some of them may be applied in practice in a way which breaches human rights in particular cases. The Committee is particularly concerned about the risk of the new provisions relating to residential tenancies giving rise in practice to homelessness in the case of people who have no right to remain in the UK but face genuine barriers to leaving. The Committee is also concerned to ensure that these measures do not give rise to an undue risk that migrant children will be exposed to homelessness or separation from family members. The provisions in the Bill on access to residential tenancies may heighten the risk of racial discrimination against prospective tenants, notwithstanding the fact that such discrimination is unlawful under the Equality Act. The First Tier Tribunal, not the Secretary of State, should decide whether it is within its jurisdiction to consider a new matter raised on an appeal. In the report, the Committee concludes that the restriction on appeal rights might constitute a serious threat to the practical ability to access the legal system to challenge unlawful immigration and asylum decisions, and to enforce the statutory duty to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children when exercising immigration and asylum functions. The Committee also comments on other aspects of the Bill.

The Sex Offender Register examines the origins, history, structure and legalities of the UK sex offender register, and explores how political and public opinion has influenced the direction the policy of registration has taken. Delving into the origins of the UK sex offender register and how the registration policy has evolved, this book provides an understanding of the register and its contribution to public protection while attempting to see the register as a policy that has grown and developed and as having an organic life of its own. The sex offender register is designed as a form of public protection rather than a punishment, requiring offenders to notify the police of their circumstances and to accept a degree of offender management from the police. The book: • puts the development of the register in its political, social and ethical context • considers the position of children and young people as offenders • outlines the movement of registered offenders across international borders • analyses how offenders can be removed from the register • explores how other countries in the UK manage sex offenders through registers • asks questions about the efficacy of the register and what contribution it makes to public protection • looks at specific aspects of registration including the management of information • delves into the experience of life on the register • examines the influence of public opinion • discusses the role of the police as custodians of the register and as offender managers. Exploring the different pressures brought to bear on the register, this book provides an authoritative starting point for police officers, social workers, probation officers, magistrates, students of Criminology, Criminal Justice and Policing, and the general reader wanting to understand where the UK sex offender register originated from and how it operates today.

Includes a foreword by Major General David A. Rubenstein. From the editor: "71F, or "71 Foxtrot," is the AOC (area of concentration) code assigned by the U.S. Army to the specialty of Research Psychology. Qualifying as an Army research psychologist requires, first of all, a Ph.D. from a research (not clinical) intensive graduate psychology program. Due to their advanced education, research psychologists receive a direct commission as Army officers in the Medical Service Corps at the rank of captain. In terms of numbers, the 71F AOC is a small one, with only 25 to 30 officers serving in any given year. However, the 71F impact is much bigger than this small cadre suggests. Army research psychologists apply their extensive training and expertise in the science of psychology and social behavior toward understanding, preserving, and enhancing the health, well being, morale, and performance of Soldiers and military families. As is clear throughout the pages of this book, they do this in many ways and in many areas, but always with a scientific approach. This is the 71F advantage: applying the science of psychology to understand the human dimension, and developing programs, policies, and products to benefit the person in military operations. This book grew out of the April 2008 biennial conference of U.S. Army Research Psychologists, held in Bethesda, Maryland. This meeting was to be my last as Consultant to the Surgeon General for Research Psychology, and I thought it would be a good idea to publish proceedings, which had not been done before. As Consultant, I'd often wished for such a document to help explain to people what it is that Army Research Psychologists "do for a living." In addition to our core group of 71Fs, at the Bethesda 2008 meeting we had several brand-new members, and a number of distinguished retirees, the "grey-beards" of the 71F clan. Together with longtime 71F colleagues Ross Pastel and Mark Vaitkus, I also saw an unusual opportunity to capture some of the history of the Army Research Psychology specialty while providing a representative sample of current 71F research and activities. It seemed to us especially important to do this at a time when the operational demands on the Army and the total force were reaching unprecedented levels, with no sign of easing, and with the Army in turn relying more heavily on research psychology to inform its programs for protecting the health, well being, and performance of Soldiers and their families."

The pharmaceutical industry exists to serve the community, but over the years it has engaged massively in corporate crime, with the public footing the bill. This readable study by experts in medicine, law, criminology and public health documents the pr