23. ACADEMIC – Terrorism itself is a problem of great relevance. People are afraid and there is no easy solution. The need to minimise the threat of future attacks is a strong incentive to intervene harshly. Governments have proven to be willing to do away with certain human rights protections in order to achieve increased security (or at least the feeling of increased security). Scholars have warned against this both when it comes to administrative measures and when it comes to the preventive use of criminal law. Therefore, we will take into account both systems, compare them in a systematic manner and provide concrete recommendations on which steps to take to minimise the potential for arbitrariness. In doing just this, our research is able to add valuable information to the debate on how best to tackle terrorism in a democratic society based on the rule of law.

24. SOCIETAL AND PRACTICAL – The societal and practical relevance are high as well. In preventing terrorism, governments have sometimes intervened harshly and arbitrarily (e.g. extraordinary renditions, indefinite detention in Guantanamo or Belmarsh). Getting a clear view of which measures are least conducive to arbitrariness and which safeguards can be put in place is essential in order to react appropriately to the threat that terrorism poses. Sometimes human rights protection and security are seen as antithetical, but this is not our view at all.