Assessing Damage, Urging Action On the assumption that the contemporary terrorist threat is exceptional, some argue that exceptional responses are required, and that the current legal framework, not having envisaged such a global and dangerous threat, is essentially inadequate. The Panel had the unparalleled opportunity to meet and discuss the contemporary threat with senior political, police, military, and intelligence personnel, from many countries around the world. The Panel also visited places where it could see directly for itself the profound impact that terrorist violence has had on people’s lives. The panellists are jurists, they do not have the wide range of technological, military, and political expertise that would be required to sit in judgment about the detailed nature of the threat country by country, and how, or even, if it can be differentiated from earlier, or indeed future, threats. Whilst some of the exceptionalism claimed for the current terrorist threat was far from self-evident, some conclusions can be drawn from the extensive testimony received. The Panel, for example, was left in no doubt that: • terrorism is a reality and it poses a serious threat to many people; • the threat posed by terrorism is likely to be long-term; • terrorist operations can be international in character and are often transfrontier in impact; • the nature of the threat posed varies from place to place, can also vary over time, and that the threat is sometimes highly localised and sometimes part of a wider agenda created by groups operating in different parts of the world, with different aims; • a recognition of the contemporary threat, or threats, should not in any sense minimise the human suffering inflicted by terrorism in the past;23 • terrorist and counter-terrorist strategies can access advanced technologies, especially communication technologies, which create new challenges for the prevention and the punishment of crime; • in some situations, genuine efforts to address the contemporary threats from terrorism have led to serious human rights abuses; and that, elsewhere, human rights violations occur because counter-terrorism is being used as a excuse by governments to exploit the situation for their own political ends.24 23 Victims of other earlier phases of terrorism expressed concern at the exceptionalism being applied to the current situation which might lead observers to think that atrocities such as those that occurred in the past (Algeria in the 1990’s was one example given) were somehow less serious than current attacks. 24 The Panel was given many credible examples of situations where governments have portrayed long-standing conflicts as part of a global response to terrorism, apparently with a view to securing international approval 23