Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making that point. The hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) has said that he did this reluctantly, but he has deployed the argument that this is the thin end of the wedge. My argument is that the provision reflects the specific circumstances in Northern Ireland. It is based on the very high standard of justice through the Diplock courts, and nobody should question the quality of justice. The legislation will apply only to Northern Ireland, and it will wither on the vine as the risk reduces from those people who pose the kind of threat that we are seeking to deal with. This is not the thin edge of the wedge; this is a specific set of decision-making processes that reflects the circumstances in Northern Ireland. Having indicated that I am not prepared to accept the amendments tabled by the hon. Member for Argyll and Bute, I want to explain our further thoughts on clause 7 and on some of the arguments that were advanced in Committee, where the provision was subject to intense scrutiny and debate. Members on both sides of the Committee made it clear that there was good sense in tidying up the drafting of clause 7. We have brought together what were previously two separate subsections in subsection (1) to make our intention absolutely clear. We have also sought to clarify a point made by the hon. Member for Tewkesbury, who asked whether a challenge could be made under section 7(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998. I hope that we have made it clear that that can provide the grounds for a challenge. As I said in Committee, however, the Human Rights Act 1998 does not guarantee ““a trial by jury””; it guarantees ““a fair trial””. The judge-alone system in Northern Ireland guarantees a fair trial.