text_body: --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  <p>The Aye-voters agreed that <a href="http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2001/10024--e.htm#22">Clauses 22-24</a> should be part of the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmbills/049/2002049.htm"> Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill</a>.</p>
  
  <p>Clauses 22 and 23 say that the Secretary of State can indefinitely detain, pending deportation (within the provisions of the Immigration Act 1971), anyone he suspects is a terrorist even if the law forbids that person's deportation from ever taking place.</p>
  
  <p>This part of the Bill was challenged on behalf of the 20 prisoners known to have been detained without charge on the basis of this Act for more than two years in Belmarsh prison by the Law Lords <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldjudgmt/jd041216/a&oth-1.htm"> in a judgement on the 16 December 2004</a>. 
  
  <p>They found that its application was unlawful under the <a href="http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html">European Convention on Human Rights</a>, as incorporated into British Law by the <a href="http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980042.htm">Human Rights Act 1998</a>, and that the Government's claim to have "opted-out" of the provisions of the Convention was invalid due to the fact that there was no "state of public emergency threatening the life of the nation".</p>
    
  
  <p>Clause 24 states the conditions under which a suspected terrorist could be granted bail.</p>
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  <p><i>Question put</i>, That clauses 22 to 24 stand part of the Bill:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p><i>The Committee divided:</i> Ayes 347, Noes 70.</p>
  
  