IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v54y2006i3p607-627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democracy in the Light of Security: British and French Political Discourses on Domestic Counter‐Terrorism Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Anastassia Tsoukala

Abstract

This article aims to question the relationship between security and liberty that lies at the heart of the current debates on European counter‐terrorism policies. It analyses the statements reported in the press made by defenders of the emergency rules thesis and their rivals in the UK and France from September 2001 to June 2003. The findings reveal that, in both cases, the legitimation of the emergency measures rests upon a set of sovereignty‐related arguments that reframe the notion of freedom and the place of human rights in contemporary democracies. The defenders of the human rights thesis denounce the reframing of civil liberties but fail to address the freedom issue.

Suggested Citation

  • Anastassia Tsoukala, 2006. "Democracy in the Light of Security: British and French Political Discourses on Domestic Counter‐Terrorism Policies," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(3), pages 607-627, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:54:y:2006:i:3:p:607-627
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2006.00609.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2006.00609.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2006.00609.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:46:y:2008:i::p:1-25 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jef Huysmans & Alessandra Buonfino, 2008. "Politics of Exception and Unease: Immigration, Asylum and Terrorism in Parliamentary Debates in the UK," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(4), pages 766-788, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:54:y:2006:i:3:p:607-627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.