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 state 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 the deportation from taking place.</p>
  
  <p>This is the part of the Bill that was challenged on behalf of the 20 prisoners known to have been detained without charge 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 claim to have "opted-out" of this Act was invalid because there is not in fact a "state of public emergency threatening the life of the nation".</p>
    
  
  <p>Clause 24 stated 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>
  
  