GREATER NUMBERS of heavily armed police were deployed at British airports and London’s railway stations yesterday following intelligence services’ concerns that the threat of a Mumbai-style attack has increased.
The 2008 attack in the Indian city left nearly 200 people dead after a three-day rampage by a group of terrorists.
Despite the higher visibility of armed officers, the Metropolitan Police said the terrorism alert in the UK remained at “severe” – the second-highest possible ranking, though it could be raised at a moment’s notice to “critical”, meaning an imminent attack is feared, security sources have said.
“There is a continuing need for everyone to remain vigilant and to report any suspicious activity to the police,” the Home Office said. The Metropolitan Police spokesman said security measures were under constant review. “We will police accordingly and use a range of covert and overt tactics which remain under constant review.”
Last month, nine men suspected of being involved in plotting attacks on the US embassy in London and the London Stock Exchange were charged with terrorism offences, following one of the largest raids carried out by police in the last two years.
Concerns have been further heightened in the wake of the mid-December attack in Stockholm when a British-resident Iraqi blew himself up on a busy street, killing himself and wounding two others.
The decision to deploy extra armed officers came just hours before British deputy prime minister Nick Clegg insisted regulations on control orders – where suspects are confined to house arrest, electronically tagged and forbidden to make telephone calls or use the internet – must be changed, despite considerable opposition from intelligence officials. “Control orders cannot continue in their present form. They must be replaced,” Mr Clegg said in London. “I don’t think it’s justifiable to impose what is virtual house arrest without being able to charge and commit someone first.
“And we will introduce a system that is more proportionate, in line with our long-held commitment to due process and civil liberties, that seeks to disrupt and impede would-be terrorists from carrying out their heinous crimes, and that continues to focus on bringing terrorists to justice.”
However, he insisted, despite the doubts evident from many of his Liberal Democrats backbenchers, that a small number of suspects deemed to be dangerous by the security authorities, but who cannot be put on trial because it would, they say, jeopardise efforts to gather intelligence, will still need to be subject to control orders. “I don’t think it’s justifiable to impose virtual house arrest without having to charge or convict someone first. I think it’s very clear it’s one of the current flaws we are seeking to address, but at the same time you have to deal with the inescapable reality that there are a small number of people who want to cause immense damage to us who, for one reason or another, good or bad, we cannot get to court,” he said.
The future of the control orders, which the Liberal Democrats vowed to abolish when in opposition, has been the subject of deep debate between the party’s senior figures and their Conservative coalition colleagues since they entered office in May. However, Mr Clegg yesterday rejected charges the issue is being dealt with through “a party political prism”. He insisted there was not a “straightforward trade-off between liberty or security, as if one must come at the expense of the other”. “It is about how we balance the two. How we underpin both. And how we can make sure people who break the law and seek to do us harm are charged, convicted, and put in prison.” – (Additional reporting: PA)