ABSTRACT
In the past 15 years there has been an enormous expansion of counter-terrorism laws and policies at national, regional and international levels. Spurred on by the events of 9/11 and, later, the phenomenon of ‘foreign terrorist fighters’, states and international institutions have introduced laws and policies that encroach greatly on fundamental freedoms and human rights (at times in ways that undermine the democratic process), and the international conception of the ‘rule of law’ has been ‘securitized’ to a striking degree. What has been less common, however, is the comprehensive and reflexive evaluation of whether such measures are, in fact, effective. In this chapter, I will outline this expansion in counter-terrorism and its impact on human rights, democracy and the Rule of Law in order to argue that evaluation of effectiveness is key in maintaining the legitimacy of the counter-terrorist state and supra-state. Having done that, I will explore what the notion of ‘effectiveness’ means in this context, identifying both meta- and specific objectives as critical sites of analysis. Based on this, the chapter will propose key principles for the design of effectiveness evaluation, taking into account the particular challenges of evidence in the counter-terrorist context.
