In the period since 9/11, not only in Europe and the US, but in Asia as well many measures restricting human rights have appeared under the pretext of combating terrorism have appeared. The JCLU surveys the operation of these measures, which are at the center of its work.
Two important measures were passed by the Diet in June 2002. The first measure is a ratification draft of a UN treaty, the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. The second, a piece of domestic legislation, is a bill entitled Draft Law on the Punishment of Financing Criminal Acts Intended to Intimidate the Population.E In neither of these measures, however, is the term terrorismEprecisely defined. The bill lacks a requirement that there be a specific connection between the provision of funds and a terror plan, and the definition of an act of terror is unclear. Moreover, the treatyunlike the anti-terrorism treaty of the Organization of the Islamic Conferencefails to distinguish between terror and force associated with a movement aimed at achieving the independence of a people. And since the bill leaves the decision as to whether something is terrorEup to the investigative agencies, as public order legislation it contains the danger that it will stir up rage.
On April 3, 2002, the JCLU submitted a written opinion on the ratification of the treaty and on the bill. In essence, the JCLU points out that both measures contravene the principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege), and constitute an infringement of freedom of thought and conscience. The JCLU opposes hasty ratification of the treaty draft and passage of the bill, explaining that there is a danger that the measures will restrict humanitarian assistance for victims of war abroad and other calamities. In addition to urging that these problematic aspects be reconsidered, the JCLU will itself make efforts to improve the legislation.