This article analyzes counterterrorist lawmaking as an instance of security politics. It does so through archival parliamentary analysis of British counterterrorism legislation at three different times: in the wake of a perceived security emergency (2001); when the impact of an emergency is fading (2008); and when there is no emergency (2000). The findings show that over time, legislative exceptions and emergencies become normalized. By taking a parliamentary, legislative, and historical perspective, the article also challenges some of the assumptions of the exceptionalism debate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrew W. Neal (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: