IMPACT OF COUNTER-TERRORISM ON NON-ASSOCIATED

The article “IMPACT OF COUNTER-TERRORISM ON NON-ASSOCIATED” is written by Dhyey Jani and Zarana Acharya, third-year law students at the Institute of Law, Nirma University

Introduction

• As per the United Nations, “Measures taken to combat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including measures to prevent and combat terrorism, to prosecute and punish its perpetrators, and to facilitate the exchange of information about terrorist groups and activities.¹“
• Moreover European Union defines counterterrorism as “All activities aimed at preventing, combating and responding to terrorist acts, both domestically and internationally.”²

Famous counter-terrorism operations across the world.

1. Operation Enduring Freedom: Targeting al-Qaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan post- 9/11.
2. Operation Neptune Spear: Successful raid leading to the death of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.
3. Operation Inherent Resolve: Combating ISIS in Iraq and Syria with coalition support.
4. Operation Barkhane: French-led operation countering extremism in the Sahel region.
5. Operation Zarb-e-Azb: Pakistani military operation targeting militants in North Waziristan.
6. Operation Hammer: Indian security forces’ counter-insurgency operation in Jammu and Kashmir.
7. Operation Althea: EU and NATO operation stabilizing Bosnia and countering terrorism.
8. Operation Green Hunt: Indian operation combating Naxalite-Maoist insurgency.

A.     Overview of the Impact of Counterterrorism on Non-Associated Individuals

• Counter-terrorism policies, while crucial for safeguarding national security, can inadvertently affect individuals who are not directly involved in terrorist activities. These non-associated individuals often face a range of unintended consequences, including infringements on their civil liberties, changes in societal dynamics, psychological distress, and economic disruptions due to stringent counter-terrorism measures³.
• Similarly, travel bans and restrictions have been set up that selectively target individuals from those specific countries/regions considered high-risk. This often leads to unacceptable racial or ethnic profiling and stigmatization of innocent people merely because of their nationality or ethnicity as with the U.S. travel ban targeting predominantly Muslim-majority countries⁴.

B.     Importance of Analysing the Unintended Consequences of Counterterrorism Policies

• Becoming aware of the unforeseen negative outcomes of anti-terrorism measures is vital to guarantee that those individuals cannot face human rights violations or difficulties. Critical examination of these policies is imperative for the creation of neutral but effective counterterrorism policies that comply with the dual principles of protecting security and freedom.
• The erosion of civil liberties based on counter-terrorism activities is what has aroused considerable attention for a long time. The introduction of preventive detention, secret courts, and invasive surveillance without due oversight may endanger due process and the very basis of the rule of law. The instance surrounding the Canadian citizen, Maher Arar who was falsely detained and tortured due to poor intelligence sharing among countries illustrates the risk of such actions⁵.

Assessment of Civil Liberties

1. Increased Surveillance and Its Implications on Privacy

• The attempts to fight against terror may include controlling of the general population through the means of extensive surveillance, which is a serious threat to privacy. Others who are not related might feel that their right to privacy is being infringed, which then lowers the scope of freedom of association and expression.

• Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits intrusion of the privacy of people within the jurisdiction of the State and requires them to protect the individual against illegal or unlawful intrusion into his/her privacy. Privacy is understood as the data concerning the identity of an individual as well as the personal life of the person.⁶

• The enhancement of surveillance powers by the intelligence agencies serves as an instance illustrating a serious question relevant to the issue of privacy. For example, the mass surveillance programs of the NSA, which became public due to Edward Snowden’s disclosure in 2013, helped to understand the level of ordinary citizens’ communications being spied on without their awareness or permission⁷. Such wide-scale and unwarranted surveillance postures would go a long way in creating mistrust thus inhibiting people from freely airing their opinions or associating with others fearing of unwanted government scrutiny.

• The shutdown of the internet in the Kashmir valley has made it easier for the authorities to keep track of the citizens, and it causes varied implications for the widespread right to privacy. Residents are exposed to excessive oversight of their online behaviours as few channels make it easier for them to communicate digitally⁸. Users’ online activities that are under intensive internet surveillance harm privacy as their information is potentially subject to violations from the authorities. The opaqueness of the surveillance techniques creates more worries, as people get undeservingly monitored without clear guidelines to minimize disrespect of their privacy rights.

B.       Restrictions on Freedom of Movement and Expression

• The counterterrorism preventive procedures can as well raise the limits of movement and expression. Additional security inspections, border controls, and prohibitions on public meetings will have an effect on the individual’s right to be themselves freely.

• The enhanced security measures of the post-9/11 regime, including increased airport screening and no-fly lists, have continually been at the centre of debates surrounding individual freedom of movement and the lack of due process. Take for example the case of Rahinah Ibrahim, a Stanford University PhD student, who was mistaken for being blacklisted in the United States no-fly list, and thus, was compelled to undergo a screening, and her boarding was denied. Consequently, the unrestricted movement of the individual was affected.⁹

• Nevertheless, restrictions on freedom of expression can be observed in terms of laws, which are responsible for penalizing certain speech forms, which are considered to be supportive of terrorism. They often contain minimal penalties and are wide-ranging in content which may produce harm to individual rights and freedom of speech. Journalists and academics, for example, may suppress their speaking in anticipation of being accused or harassed for talking about certain issues which are different from those of the government.
• The internet blackout in Kashmir Valley not only curtails the freedoms of movement and speech but also worsens the already tenuous political situation in the region. Citizens who think differently have their dissent blocked as well as peaceful interactions are reduced due to clogged communication channels. With this deterioration of liberties, not just democratic principles but also the individual freedom of speaking and fighting for rights are restricted. Consequently, the person is no longer able to voice their sovereignty. The suppression of freedom of movement creates such an isolated atmosphere where people can neither access the necessities nor engage in trade and may also lack the chance to interact with other external worlds.¹⁰

C.     Legal Complexities and Challenges in Due Process

• Even non-associated people may undergo legal difficulties and challenges of due process because counterterrorism policies have been taken into consideration. Preventive detention, secret evidence, and extended detention without charge are likely to be widely used, which can make a mockery of the legal principles of fair and transparent judicial process.

• The utilization of preventative detention and secret evidence has been one of the most controversial problems faced by counterterrorism actors. The case of detainees at Guantanamo Bay is a clear example of how due process rights are undermined in the name of national security. Some of the detainees have been held without charges or trial for a long time.¹¹

• Furthermore, the use of secret courts and classified evidence prevents people from challenging false accusations and thereby having a fair trial. Also, the legal complexities arising from counterterrorism measures may result in confusion and uncertainty for people involved in the legal system. Non-transparent and non-accountable implementation of these measures could cause wrongful convictions and erode public trust in the justice system.

• The legal grounds for internet cut-off in Kashmir increase concern on the part of both the state and the Kashmiris, regarding due process and the safety of the citizens. The existence of obscure regulations on the start and end of lockdowns increases concerns about their legality and accountability. The residents now have problems enforcing their legal rights and getting justice because of the closures which further lengthen the judicial processes. This, in effect, tramples on the rule of law and obstructs the establishment of mechanisms of accountability to authorities over human rights abuses. Besides this, the legal uncertainties that typically surround internet shutdowns create a situation of impunity where the people lack proper channels of accountability against arbitrary government interventions.¹²

Analysis of Societal Dynamics

1. Erosion of Trust within Communities

• Community measures of counterterrorism are prone to cause a loss of community trust, because members of that community may be put in the bad light of unnecessary targeting or stigmatization. It can lead to a lack of coordination between law enforcement and intelligence agencies, which will negatively affect their successful counterterrorism efforts.

• The belief that a minority group is being selectively targeted and monitored is likely to erode the trust between that group and law enforcement agencies. In the same way, after 9/11, the monitoring and surveillance of Muslims and the entire community in Western countries resulted in sentiments such as alienation and mistrust among the community members.¹³ For example, the widespread mistrust can ultimately prevent people within the community from reporting suspicious behaviours or cooperating with law enforcement which will in turn be a hindrance to the efforts to fight terrorism as a collective.

B.   Amplification of Discriminatory Practices and Social Stigmatization

• Security services in counterterrorism can enhance the level of discrimination and social stigma towards particular national or religious groups. This may result in the further marginalization and exclusion of these communities, generating conditions perfect for ideologies becoming radicalized.

• Many times, the use of sweeping and unselective anti-terrorist policies goes astray and exceeds its limits, resulting in defamation and persecution of ethnically or religiously defined sections of the population. Such as the Uighur Muslim community in China fell victim to intensive prejudice and tracking under the guise of counter-terrorism policy, an outcome of which was a severe violation of human rights and mass arrests of the dissenters.¹⁴

• On the other hand in the Western countries Department of Homeland Security’s Counterterrorism policies usually lead to very negative consequences such as heightened scrutiny, surveillance and discrimination of the Muslim community. Such types of behaviour could more than anyone else be the recipe for extremism, which is created by those feeling marginalized or alienated.

C.   Shifts in Societal Relationships and Cohesion

• The adoption of counterterrorism measures, in turn, could result in transformational societal connections and cohesiveness. Fear and mistrust might become the values of social communication which, eventually, might result in becoming a divided society.

• Along with uniting community members, policies intended to counter terrorism often heighten fear and mistrust. In turn, this can significantly impact societal relationships and cohesion. An example is the fact that countries such as the US and the UK boasting high levels of surveillance and security measures like CCTV must be able to lead to the oppression of Muslims whereby they feel more sidelined and accept that there is an upsurge of Islamophobia leading to division among them.¹⁵

• Similarly, the counterterrorism strategy becomes stigmatized and full of suspicion which infiltrates various institutions of the society, including job places, schools and public squares which consequently results in further divisions and undermining social cohesion.
• Such an analysis would thereby present in detail the society in conjunction with counter-terrorism measures, and their effects on the aspect supported with case examples and relevant sources.

Exploration of Psychological Well-being

1. Psychological Distress Induced by Counterterrorism Measures

• Counterterrorism measures may impose tremendous psychological strain on individuals who are not members and may not have any affiliation with these terrorist cells. Pervasive watching, worries about being implicated for something done wrongly or generally feeling insecure can all these at the service of mental health disorders.

• Extensive surveillance through modern technology as well as more guards and strictures has been proven to cause suspicions and fearfulness in people. The research shows that harassment of the person who is under surveillance can lead to increased levels of stress, anxiety, as well as psychological discomfort.¹⁶

• Furthermore, the fact of being allegedly wrongfully targeted or included in counterterrorism operations can lead to a deterioration of a sense of security and vulnerability. The prolonged sense of nervousness and terror may have the most lasting negative impact on people’s mental health, and it brings about such a result as depression, PTSD and other disorders related to prolonged stress load.

B.   Emotional Toll on Individuals from Heightened Fear and Stress

• The negative psychological impact caused by counter-terrorism operations can cause lasting emotional scars and physical stress on individuals and result in the deterioration of living standards and life quality in general.

• It is the ever-constant atmosphere of anxiety and tension, due to the notion of terror and privacy intrusion together with over-protection measures and surveillance, which can cause the increased levels of stress and anxiety of the whole population. Long-term chronic emotional distress may result in sleep problems, mood swings, social isolation, and other emotional or psychological problems that reduce the quality of life for these individuals.¹⁷
• In the face of actual stories depicting emotional burden are recollections about the consequences of terrorist attacks. Families of 9/11 attack survivors living in different parts of the United States and the international community have experienced the same reactions to the attacks. Extreme distress, as well as elevated psychological disorders prevalence, affect the public in a broader social context, including the case of people who are far from Manhattan, New York City. ¹⁸

C.   Importance of Addressing Psychological Well-being in Policymaking

• It is essential to address the psychological well-being of non-associated individuals in policymaking. Counterterrorism strategies should not only focus on security but also consider the potential psychological impact on innocent individuals and incorporate measures to mitigate these effects.

• Incorporating a psychological well-being perspective in counterterrorism policymaking is crucial to ensuring that policies are not only effective in enhancing security but also considerate of the well-being and rights of innocent individuals. This can be achieved through the implementation of measures such as psychological support services, community engagement programs, and public awareness campaigns to mitigate the negative psychological effects of counterterrorism measures.

• For example, in the UK, the government’s Prevent strategy has been criticized as focusing too much on security measures, including surveillance, while not examining the psychological and social aspects of counter-terrorism. Counter-terrorism program takes the whole gamut of the support structure, which can range from psychological support, and community engagement to soft intervention for the wellbeing of individuals.
• This detailing offers a thorough examination of the psychological well-being which is affected by counterterrorism measures and is supported by real-life examples and appropriate resources.

Examination of Economic Implications

1. Disruptions to Livelihoods and Economic Activities

• Counterterrorism measures will be a cause of disturbance to the livelihoods and economic activity of people not linked with the terrorists. More security measures, travel restrictions, and economic sanctions could be the result of the situation and be detrimental to employment, trade, and business activities. The adoption of strict security provisions, including tough border controls and thorough security checks, may cause significant restrictions to travelling and trade. For example, the stringent security protocols in place at airports after 9/11 led to longer waiting times and delays which in turn affected both business travellers and the tourism industry. Apart from that, economic sanctions imposed on countries that are suspected of supporting terrorism can interfere with trade and economic cooperation thus affecting the business and the general public who are engaged in international trade.

B.  Impact on Trade, Investment, and Economic Stability

The impact of counterterrorism policies on the economy can reach beyond trade, foreign direct investments, and overall economic stability. The outcomes of the reduction of consumer confidence, increased costs of security compliance, and trade barriers can have a range of economic consequences. Counterterrorism measures may cause consumer confidence to drop as a result of the increased perception of terrorism, leading to fewer consumers and investments. Moreover, there will be more costs that the businesses will have to pay due to security compliance which may eventually result in high operational costs and a weakened position in the global market.

There are real-life examples that prove the impact on the stability of the economy can be observed in the case of countries that suffer from a major terror attack. One such attack is the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks and its impact on foreign investment and tourism which is also substantial in contrast to increased security concerns and perceptions of instability.

C.   Mitigating Economic Repercussions for Non-Associated Individuals

• The steps should be taken to decrease the economic consequences for those non-associated individuals by developing some special programs and facilitating access to economic prospects as well as minimizing economic disruptions.
• To solve the economic problems, which are experienced by non-associated people, special support programs are needed to help affected businesses and individuals. For example, the government can be the one to offer financial assistance, tax incentives, and training programs to assist businesses with the implementation of heightened security measures alongside compliance requirements.
• Besides, the improvement of job training, education and employment programs can allow people affected by counterterrorism measures to overcome adverse economic effects. Through equipping people with the required skills and resources, they are enabled to optimally adjust to the economic environment which is rapidly changing and hence obtain sustainable job opportunities.

Policy Recommendations

1. Balancing Security Imperatives with Respect for Civil Liberties:

• Establish Clear Legal Frameworks: States should adopt a comprehensive counter- terrorism laws that are clear about the scope of the acceptable actions and at the same time they should not violate the international human rights standards. These laws should include effective safeguards that are designed to prevent misuse and must include judicial oversight, transparency, and accountability mechanisms.
• Proportionate Measures: Counter-terrorism measures should be in response to the degree of danger posed and should not breach human rights disproportionately. Governments must not adopt surveillance measures that are indiscriminate and broad so as to infringe on fundamental rights and freedoms like mass surveillance or arbitrary detention.
• Enhanced Oversight and Review Mechanisms: Implementation of the mechanism for independent supervision and periodical review of counter-terrorism policies and practices so that they do not violate human rights standards. Such measures may entail setting up parliamentary control committees, independent human rights commissions, and special control bodies.

B.  Advocating for Nuanced and Sensitive Counterterrorism Strategies:

• Community Engagement and Dialogue: Promote dialogue and collaboration between law enforcement agencies, communities, and civil society organizations to come up with local counterterrorism strategies. Develop programs that involve all stakeholders in tackling the causes of terrorism, building trust, and preventing radicalization through community-based initiatives.
• Focus on Prevention and Rehabilitation: Turn to preventive measures and rehabilitation programs for individuals who are likely to become radicalized or who are involved in terrorist activities already. Invest in social services, education, mental health support and reintegration programmes to root out the causes of radicalization and accelerate the process of deradicalization.
• Targeted and Intelligence-led Approaches: Use precision and accuracy-based targeted and intelligence-led approaches which aim to stop terrorism rather than generic measures. Use data analysis, risk assessment systems, and community intelligence to target and disrupt terrorist networks and minimize the probability of collateral damage and avoidance of harm to innocent people.

C.  Prioritizing Human Welfare in Policymaking Decisions:

• Human Rights Impact Assessments: Conduct comprehensive human rights impact assessment of the counter-terrorism policies and strategies before the process of implementation. Evaluate the possible hazards and consequences of human rights and make sure that the measures are in line with international law.
• Victim-Centered Approaches: Guarantee that counter-terrorism efforts are victim-centere, including their rights, such as access to justice, reparations, and psychosocial support. Empower the victims and their families to become part of the decision-making processes and give them the resources for redress and support.
• Transparency and Accountability: Create transparency and accountability for policy-making decisions about counter-terrorism. Governments should do their best to be transparent about their strategies, operations, and outcomes and give access to mechanisms for accountability in case of human rights violations or abuses committed in the title of counter-terrorism.

Conclusion

The comprehensive attributes of anti-terrorism operations present complicated problems which do not limit themselves to the area of security and military. Even though these steps are unquestionably important for preventing countries from a variety of threats characterizing terrorist activities, they usually cause unforeseeable negative consequences for individuals who have nothing to do with terror groups. The studies have revealed the heart-breaking effect of counterterrorism policies on private freedoms, social life, mental health and the stability of the economy. Terrorism strategies which give security priority over individual rights and freedoms tend to undermine the fundamental values of democracy, law and human rights. In Canada, the story of Maher Arar and in Kashmir, the internet shutdowns are the classical examples of the potential for abuse and violation of individual rights if the oversight and accountability mechanisms are not strong. Subsequently, the enactment of such policies can reinforce societal divisions, lead to the amplification of discriminatory practices, and erode trust between communities and the authorities. Social stigmatization and the erosion of trust that follow can hamper the community-driven efforts to fight terrorism by preventing people from coming together and sharing relevant information.

Psychologically, this pervasive surveillance could be a source of stress and anxiety amongst individuals, even those not necessarily associated with terrorist activities. This might cause a long-term mental health problem causing a decline in the quality of life and well-being of the population at large. From the economic standpoint, the impact of the measures taken to combat terrorism reaches much farther than the disruption of livelihoods, trade, and investment. It goes beyond the local and international economic scales. The economic ramifications of these policies can be detrimental for developing countries and for marginalized communities, moreover, these policies contribute to the inequalities and the vulnerabilities of these groups. In view of these facts, it is necessary that counterterrorism policies find a balance between the need for security and respect for civil rights.

The introduction of effective legal standards, the application of proportional measures, and the development of supervision and review systems are among the key steps towards a balanced approach that does not violate human rights and liberties in the course of anti-terrorism efforts. On top of that, by supporting the development of a more subtle and sensitive counterterrorism strategy that emphasizes community engagement, prevention, rehabilitation, and intelligence-led targeted approaches; we can help eliminate the unintended negative impacts of such policies. In addition, giving human rights a priority in decision-making processes through the standardization of human rights impact assessments, victim-cantered policies and the sharing of information will ensure that the rights of all individuals affected by counterterrorism actions are protected.

However, the fact that the fight against terrorism is very important must not be outweighed by the fact that counter-terrorism policies are designed and executed in a way that promotes democratic principles, human rights, and the laws of the land. The only way for countries to be able to combat terrorism successfully and at the same time protect the civil rights of their people, national unity, psychological health, and the level of economic development is to recognize a holistic and human rights-based approach.

Bibliography

1. Andrew Silke, Terrorism, Counterterrorism and the Psychology of Political Violence (Routledge 2011).
2. Arun Kundnani, The Muslims Are Coming!: Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror (Verso 2014).
3. Australian Institute of Criminology, Intelligence-Led Policing and Counterterrorism: An Overview (2018), available at https://www.aic.gov.au/.
4. R. Mohan, Cross-Border Terrorism in India: Counterterrorism Strategies and Challenges Ahead (Observer Research Foundation 2009).
5. Council of Europe, Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights: A Manual for Police Officers, available at https://www.coe.int/.
6. Miller & G. Sani, The Hate Debate: Should Hate Be Regulated? (Oxford University Press 2016).
7. Miller & G. Sani, The Hate Debate: Should Hate Be Regulated? (Oxford University Press 2016).
8. Danish Institute for Human Rights, Human Rights Impact Assessment of Legislation (2019), available at https://www.humanrights.dk/.
9. Neumayer & T. Plümper, Spatial Effects in Dyadic Data (Oxford University Press 2016).
10. E. Neumayer & T. Plümper, Spatial Effects in Dyadic Data (Oxford University Press 2016).
11. J. Rubin & S. Wessely, Public Reactions to Terrorism: Findings from the Research Literature, 31 Int’l Rev. Psychiatry 230 (2019).
12. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, Effective Parliamentary Oversight of National Security Policy, available at https://dcaf.ch/.
13. Glenn Greenwald, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State (Metropolitan Books 2014).
14. Human Rights Watch, Eradicating Ideological Viruses: China’s Campaign of Repression Against Xinjiang’s Muslims (2018).
15. Human Rights Watch, The Impact of Internet Shutdowns in Kashmir, available at https://www.hrw.org/.
16. J. Horgan, Psychology of Terrorism: Classic and Contemporary Insights (Routledge 2017).
17. K. Button & Á. Costa, The Economics of Airport Security (Edward Elgar Publishing 2011).
18. Pew Research Center, U.S. Muslims Concerned About Their Place in Society, but Continue to Believe in the American Dream (2017).
19. S. Galea, J. Ahern, H. Resnick, D. Kilpatrick, M. Bucuvalas, J. Gold & D. Vlahov, Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City, 346 New Eng. J. Med. 982 (2002).
20. T. Monahan, Surveillance in the Time of Insecurity (Rutgers University Press 2010).
21. The Constitution Project, Ill-Conceived: The Government’s Punishment of Individuals for Terrorism (2014).
22. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, The Role of Education in Countering Terrorism and Radicalization (2020), available at https://www.unesco.org/.
23. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Preventing Terrorism and Countering Violent Extremism and Radicalization that Lead to Terrorism: A Community-Policing Approach.
24. United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism: A Guide to International Human Rights Law in the Context of Counter-Terrorism, available at https://www.ohchr.org/.
25. World Bank, Jobs and Economic Transformation (2018).
26. “Internet Shutdowns and Their Impact on Human Rights in India,” ARTICLE 19, available at https://www.article19.org/
27. “Kashmir’s Digital Siege: Communication Shutdown Takes Toll on Mental Health,” Al Jazeera, available at https://www.aljazeera.com/.
28. Open Society Foundations, Transparency and Accountability in Counter-Terrorism: A Guide to Good Practice (2016), available at https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/.
29. Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Victim Assistance in Counterterrorism: Lessons Learned and Practices from the OSCE Region (2017), available at https://www.osce.org/.
30. Alternatives Humanitaires, What Are the Effects of the Fight Against Terrorism on Humanitarian                                Action?,                                https://www.alternatives- humanitaires.org/en/2021/11/12/what-are-the-effects-of-the-fight-against-terrorism- on-humanitarian-action/
31. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Politics and Principles: The Impact of Counterterrorism Measures on Principled Humanitarian Action, 104 Int’l Rev. Red Cross, 399, (2022),  available at: https://international- review.icrc.org/sites/default/files/reviews-pdf/2022-02/ politics-and-principles-the- impact-counterterrorism-measures-on-principled-humanitarian-action-916.pdf.
32. UNODC, Effects of Terrorism, https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/terrorism/module- 14/key-issues/effects-of-terrorism.html
33. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Counter-Terrorism Activities Must Respect Protections Afforded by International Humanitarian Law, available at https://www.icrc.org/en/document/counter-terrorism-activities-must-respect- protections-afforded-international-humanitarian
34. International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy (ICCLR), Counter-Terrorism Measures, available at:          https://icclr.org/wp- content/uploads/2019/06/Counter-terrorism-measures.pdf?x30145

1. European Commission, Counter-Terrorism Policy, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we- do/policies/crisis-and-terrorism/counter-terrorism_en ↩︎
2. European Commission, Counter-Terrorism Policy, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we- do/policies/crisis-and-terrorism/counter-terrorism_en ↩︎
3. Glenn Greenwald, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State (Metropolitan Books 2014). ↩︎
4. American Civil Liberties Union, Trump’s Muslim Ban: By the Numbers (2018). Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar ↩︎
5. Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, Report of the Events Relating to Maher Arar: Analysis and Recommendations (Government of Canada 2006). ↩︎
6. Coeriel et al. v. the Netherlands, A/50/40 (vol. II), annex X, sect. D, U.N. Doc. A/50/40 (Oct. 31, 1994) ↩︎
7. Glenn Greenwald, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State (Metropolitan Books 2014). ↩︎
8. “Kashmir’s Digital Siege: Communication Shutdown Takes Toll on Mental Health,” Al Jazeera, available at https://www.aljazeera.com/ ↩︎
9. The Constitution Project, Ill-Conceived: The Government’s Punishment of Individuals for Terrorism (2014). ↩︎
10. “The Impact of Internet Shutdowns in Kashmir,” Human Rights Watch, available at https://www.hrw.org/ ↩︎
11. Ibid ↩︎
12. “Internet Shutdowns and Their Impact on Human Rights in India,” ARTICLE 19, available at https://www.article19.org/ ↩︎
13. Arun Kundnani, The Muslims Are Coming!: Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror (Verso 2014). ↩︎
14. Human Rights Watch, Eradicating Ideological Viruses: China’s Campaign of Repression Against Xinjiang’s Muslims (2018). ↩︎
15. Pew Research Center, U.S. Muslims Concerned About Their Place in Society, but Continue to Believe in the American Dream (2017). ↩︎
16. T. Monahan, Surveillance in the Time of Insecurity (Rutgers University Press 2010). ↩︎
17. G. J. Rubin & S. Wessely, Public Reactions to Terrorism: Findings from the Research Literature, 31 Int’l Rev. Psychiatry 230 (2019). ↩︎
18. S. Galea, J. Ahern, H. Resnick, D. Kilpatrick, M. Bucuvalas, J. Gold & D. Vlahov, Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City, 346 New Eng. J. Med. 982 (2002). ↩︎