Turkey has&nbsp;passed a new law&nbsp;that would increase government monitoring of civil society groups, which rights groups have warned would violate the freedom of association.

The legislation approved by the Turkish parliament on Sunday permits the interior ministry to appoint NGO officials and halt groups' activities under vague terrorism charges.

It also&nbsp;allows the annual inspection of nongovernmental organizations, ostensibly to combat terrorism financing.&nbsp;The law would also apply to international civil society groups operating in Turkey.&nbsp;

The NGO controls were tacked on to legislation that the government said was needed to comply with a UN resolution on preventing the financing of weapons of mass destruction.

The bill, proposed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's ruling party, passed with the votes of the party and its nationalist allies.

Turkey's anti-terrorism laws are broad and have led to the jailing of politicians, journalists, civil society activists, and thousands of others.

Nearly 680 civil society groups signed a declaration against the bill, saying it would limit their ability to raise funds and organize while putting them under ministry pressure. They said the law violates the Turkish Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of association.

''Turkish prosecutors regularly open terrorism investigations into people for peacefully exercising rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association,''&nbsp;Human Rights Watch said in a statement before the vote.

The rights group warned the law would ''widen the scope for the Interior Ministry to restrict the activities of any organization and individuals engaged in them.''

Turkey’s refusal to implement the rulings of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) increases its risk of&nbsp;exacerbating tensions with the EU, which has&nbsp;threatened Ankara with sanctions&nbsp;over its aggressive foreign policy.

Turkey has passed a new law that would increase government monitoring of civil society groups, which rights groups have warned would violate the freedom of association.

Turkey has passed a new law that would increase government monitoring of civil society groups, which rights groups have warned would violate the freedom of association. The legislation approved by the Turkish parliament on Sunday permits the interior ministry to appoint NGO officials and halt groups' activities under vague terrorism charges. It also allows the annual inspection of nongovernmental organizations, ostensibly to combat terrorism financing. The law would also apply to international civil society groups operating in Turkey. The NGO controls were tacked on to legislation that the government said was needed to comply with a UN resolution on preventing the financing of weapons of mass destruction. The bill, proposed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's ruling party, passed with the votes of the party and its nationalist allies. Turkey's anti-terrorism laws are broad and have led to the jailing of politicians, journalists, civil society activists, and thousands of others. Nearly 680 civil society groups signed a declaration against the bill, saying it would limit their ability to raise funds and organize while putting them under ministry pressure. They said the law violates the Turkish Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of association. ''Turkish prosecutors regularly open terrorism investigations into people for peacefully exercising rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association,'' Human Rights Watch said in a statement before the vote. The rights group warned the law would ''widen the scope for the Interior Ministry to restrict the activities of any organization and individuals engaged in them.'' Turkey’s refusal to implement the rulings of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) increases its risk of exacerbating tensions with the EU, which has threatened Ankara with sanctions over its aggressive foreign policy.

Turkey passes law to tighten government control over civil society groups

Britain's Supreme Court on Thursday said it could not rule on an appeal against Northern Ireland's strict abortion laws, but that it would have declared them incompatible with human rights laws otherwise.&nbsp;

By a majority decision, the justices said that the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC), which brought the appeal, did not have the power to "institute abstract proceedings of this nature".

"It follows that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in these proceedings to give relief in respect of the challenge Northern Ireland abortion law," the ruling added.

However, the court also said that a majority of justices would have ruled the current Northern Ireland law incompatible with the European Convention on Human rights (ECHR), raising the pressure on London and Belfast to change their legislation.

"I would have concluded without real hesitation ... that the current state of Northern Ireland is incompatible with Article 8 of the Convention, insofar as it prohibits abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality, rape and incest, but not insofar as it prohibits abortion in cases of serious foetal abnormality," said judge Jonathan Mance.

This view was shared by four of the seven judges.

The court also said that a majority of justices would have ruled the current Northern Ireland law incompatible with the European Convention on Human rights

Britain's Supreme Court on Thursday said it could not rule on an appeal against Northern Ireland's strict abortion laws, but that it would have declared them incompatible with human rights laws otherwise. By a majority decision, the justices said that the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC), which brought the appeal, did not have the power to "institute abstract proceedings of this nature". "It follows that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in these proceedings to give relief in respect of the challenge Northern Ireland abortion law," the ruling added. However, the court also said that a majority of justices would have ruled the current Northern Ireland law incompatible with the European Convention on Human rights (ECHR), raising the pressure on London and Belfast to change their legislation. "I would have concluded without real hesitation ... that the current state of Northern Ireland is incompatible with Article 8 of the Convention, insofar as it prohibits abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality, rape and incest, but not insofar as it prohibits abortion in cases of serious foetal abnormality," said judge Jonathan Mance. This view was shared by four of the seven judges.

UK top court says cannot rule on Northern Ireland abortion law

&nbsp;

Britain today announced plans to allow its soldiers to opt out of European human rights law, in a move Prime Minister Theresa May said would end &quot;the industry of vexatious claims&quot; against troops.

Under the new proposal the British government said it would allow soldiers to sidestep the European Convention on Human Rights during times of conflict, depending on an assessment of the circumstances.

&quot;My government will ensure that our troops are recognised for the incredible job they do. Those who serve on the frontline will have our support when they come home.

&quot;We will repay them with gratitude and put an end to the industry of vexatious claims that has pursued those who served in previous conflicts,&quot; May said in a statement.

The plan, announced during the ruling Conservative Party&#39;s annual conference, is intended to prevent legal claims against members of the armed forces which defence minister Michael Fallon said amounted to &quot;false charges&quot;.

&quot;Our legal system has been abused to level false charges against our troops on an industrial scale.

&quot;It has caused significant distress to people who risked their lives to protect us, it has cost the taxpayer millions and there is a real risk it will stop our armed forces doing their job,&quot; he said.

In their announcement the government said despite the opt-out from European legislation, soldiers would continue to abide by the Geneva Conventions.

Britain set up the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) to investigate allegations by Iraqi civilians of abuse by British soldiers between the US-led invasion in 2003 and 2009 when British combat troops left.

As of March 31, 2016, the team was investigating 1,374 cases, with allegations related to ill treatment, missing persons and deaths.

The ministry of defence said in January that the IHAT had dropped 57 investigations, while the military&#39;s prosecuting authority stopped one additional case.

A total of 326 cases have been settled, with compensation payments totalling 20 million Pounds ($26 million, 23 million Euros).

More broadly, Britain has spent more than 100 million pounds on Iraq-related investigations, inquiries and compensation, the government said on Tuesday.

(AFP)

The government said soldiers would continue to abide by the Geneva Conventions

Britain today announced plans to allow its soldiers to opt out of European human rights law, in a move Prime Minister Theresa May said would end "the industry of vexatious claims" against troops. Under the new proposal the British government said it would allow soldiers to sidestep the European Convention on Human Rights during times of conflict, depending on an assessment of the circumstances. "My government will ensure that our troops are recognised for the incredible job they do. Those who serve on the frontline will have our support when they come home. "We will repay them with gratitude and put an end to the industry of vexatious claims that has pursued those who served in previous conflicts," May said in a statement. The plan, announced during the ruling Conservative Party's annual conference, is intended to prevent legal claims against members of the armed forces which defence minister Michael Fallon said amounted to "false charges". "Our legal system has been abused to level false charges against our troops on an industrial scale. "It has caused significant distress to people who risked their lives to protect us, it has cost the taxpayer millions and there is a real risk it will stop our armed forces doing their job," he said. In their announcement the government said despite the opt-out from European legislation, soldiers would continue to abide by the Geneva Conventions. Britain set up the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) to investigate allegations by Iraqi civilians of abuse by British soldiers between the US-led invasion in 2003 and 2009 when British combat troops left. As of March 31, 2016, the team was investigating 1,374 cases, with allegations related to ill treatment, missing persons and deaths. The ministry of defence said in January that the IHAT had dropped 57 investigations, while the military's prosecuting authority stopped one additional case. A total of 326 cases have been settled, with compensation payments totalling 20 million Pounds ($26 million, 23 million Euros). More broadly, Britain has spent more than 100 million pounds on Iraq-related investigations, inquiries and compensation, the government said on Tuesday. (AFP)

Britain may allow troops to opt out of European human rights law