'Wrong to stop social aid to terror suspects' wives'

Britain is wrong to restrict social security payments to the wives of terror suspects, the top European court advisor said in an opinion yesterday.

EU Advocate General Paolo Mengozzi, whose opinion is influential but not binding on the European courts, argued that while those on the UN Security Council sanctions list were not eligible for aid, benefits paid to their spouses should be seen as direct aid to those on the terror list.

The opinion could have repercussions for Britain's anti-terror laws.

The case was referred to the European court by Britain's House of Lords after the wives of suspects whom Britain says have links to al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and the Taliban have appealed against restrictions on their benefits, claiming a violation of their rights.

They argue that while their husbands are subject to an asset freeze, they themselves are not and should continue to receive social security aid such as child benefit and housing support

Under British anti-terrorism laws the spouses of terror suspects may also see their social payments restricted.

"It is clear to me," the advocate general said in a written opinion, "that by enduring payment of the rent charged for the residential occupation of real property, or the sums payable for the consumption of domestic utilities, the appellants do not provide their spouses (the suspects) with economic resources."

He said he couldn't see how anyone on the terror list "could obtain any such assets" given that his funds and/or economic resources have been frozen".

The advocate general concluded that restrictions on social assistance payments to the terror spouses should only be applied when the couple live together and the money may be used "to pay for goods or services which the person included on that (terror) list will use or from which he will benefit."