The British High Court ruled that a freezing of assets of the special order of the government of terrorism suspects was illegal.
The judge of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom said that the government exceeded its powers by controlling the finances of the five suspects.
Moreover, the lifting of the ban on men who brought the challenge.
The court said the government should have sought congressional approval of the scheme assets freeze instead of automatically.
The five men at the center of the case was only one week allowed 10 in cash and may need a special permit for other expenses.
But the decision leaves the question of future status. The Treasury was given a month to resolve some of the questions and the lower courts still watch the rest.
In its decision, the judge said the Supreme Court if the government would take far-reaching action to combat terrorism requires the consent of Parliament.
Lord Hope said: Even in the face of the threat of international terrorism, human security is the supreme law.
We’ve so carefully protected from uncontrolled interference with personal liberty. The two contracts for the asset freeze by Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he.
The original of the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Regulations 2006 and 2006 of al-Qaida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) Order made under section 1 of the United Nations Act 1946 to implement Council resolutions UN Security.
Both contracts were part of British law no parliamentary debate, the men said, was unfair because the government was criminal, it creates a vote.
The men also claimed that the British system, beyond what had been the United Nations should be criticized, particularly those related to terrorism, rather than a relationship during the trial was.
Lord Hope, said the Finance Minister had the power, which has been developed and implemented the contract beyond terrorism.
This is a clear example of an attempt to negatively affect the fundamental rights of citizens, not the clear authority of Parliament, he said.
In the second type of restriction, the Al-Qaeda said Order, Lord Hope, one of the five men, Mohammed al-Ghabra, denied the fundamental right to a legal challenge to the controls, saying it was unfair.