9.11.2017 A & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 1123 (11 August 2004) 21(2), already cited. The certifications in this case were under 21(2)(b) and (c) so that the persons certified are claimed to be either a member of or belonging to a international terrorist group (as defined in Section 21(3)), or has links with such a group. It is submitted that the Commission have interpreted the word "group" in Section 21 too widely. The point is taken in a general way and there has been very little reference to the evidence about specific groups, which was analysed in great detail by the Commission. 56. The Commission referred, at paragraph 87, to the submissions before it: "The terms of derogation and the nature of the public emergency to which it relates are important because of contentions on behalf of the Appellants that their activities, however they might otherwise be categorised for the purposes of the section 21, fell outside the scope of the derogation and that emergency. They also were concerned at the number of links relied on in the chain to establish a connection to Al Qa'eda." 57. Mr Gill submits that it is necessary to show that there is some factor by reference to which a set of persons associate or combine, what brings them together as a group and what defines the character of the group. The combining factor must, it is submitted, at least be the assistance or support they render in respect of activities comprising part of Al Qa'eda's terrorist agenda. A significant level of activity is contemplated and a group having a common aim or policy. It is submitted that the Commission's analysis lacks precision and does not avoid the risk of guilt by association. 58. The Commission referred, at paragraph 87, to the evidence at the derogation hearings: "Al Qa'eda and its associates are loosely knit, lack formal organisational structures and have links with other active terrorist organisations". The Commission noted that the Respondent's evidence before them: "referred regularly to the link to Al Qa'eda being created not just by national groups but by a loosely co-ordinated series of overlapping networks". It was submitted to the Commission that the derogation covered individuals in the United Kingdom who are members of Al Qa'eda or its associated networks or are linked to members of such organisations or groups and are by reason of that fact part of the threat to the United Kingdom which comprises the current public emergency. A number of groups were identified. " 59. The Commission concluded, at paragraph 99: "We accept the general schematic description of Al Qa'eda and its associated networks; it was borne out by all the evidence which we heard and was not the subject of serious debate. Terrorist groups have historically worked in small cells, often disconnected from each other with deliberate cut-outs in the chain of command, with direct communication at operational level to the leadership hierarchy discouraged. We deal later with the specific groups referred to because their relationship, if any, to Al Qa'eda was the subject of dispute. But we accept [Mr Williams' QC, then leading counsel for the Respondent] submission as to what connections and with whom had to be shown for purposes of the derogation and in very summary form his submission as to why, if such connections are shown, it shows the link to the public emergency and why the threat is increased. Of course, Mr Williams is using the word "link" in its specific statutory meaning. Mr Williams submitted that it would be an unwarranted restriction on the scope of the emergency to require the group for which an Appellant was a member or to which he was "linked" in the statutory sense to be a supporter of the core aims of Al Qa'eda as expressed in the February 1998 fatwa. That was one core aim or statement of intent and means but not the only objective. Its objectives were a combination of the global and national, the latter being part of and assisting the former and vice versa. It was not necessary to show that an individual supported that fatwa in order to show, to the requisite standard of proof, that he was both an international terrorist and connected to the public emergency. " http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2004/1123.html 14/113