The States & Antiterrorism Dialogue & Resistance
Mark Sidel, January 2004
Summary
In the early days after September 11, a number of states moved quickly to enact various forms of strengthened antiterrorism legislation—some expanding the definition of terrorism in state law and strengthening punishments, others adopting new measures on emergencies and public health, and some engaging in vigorous debate about providing law enforcement with new wiretapping and surveillance tools. These moves did not occur in an empty playing ‹eld, for a number of states had already begun addressing terrorism-related issues in the 1990s.
Keywords
Terrorism Dialogue Human Rights
Preview
Metadata
Related publications
Enhance approaches to address the evolving nature of Violent Extremist Attacks …
According to the Centre for Human Rights and Policy Studies (CHRIPS) observatory report, the majority of attacks in …
Trends of Violent Extremist Attacks and Arrests in Kenya, January - December 20…
This report draws from the Terror Attacks and Arrests Observatory of the Centre for Human Rights and Policy …
The psychologisation of counterextremism: unpacking PREVENT
: The burgeoning ‘pre-crime’ industry reveals a deep overlap between national security and mental health. The UK’s counter-radicalisation …
Managing role expectations and emotions in encounters with extremism: Norwegian…
To prevent radicalisation and violent extremism, many European countries have adopted a multiagency approach, consisting of both police, …