The Methodist Church has made clearly known its concerns over proposals to introduce "control orders" for the detention of terror suspects without trial.

The proposals will subject British terror suspects to tough restrictions, including house arrest. The Methodist Church had welcomed the announcement that prisoners detained in Belmarsh and Woodhill prisons would be allowed to leave under anti-terrorist legislation eventually. This would mean that they would remain certified and in prison "between now and when the new legislation is in place," said Home Secretary Charles Clarke. Though he said the proposals are "contentious", he believes that the terror suspects "continue to pose a threat to national security."

However, Steve Hucklesby, Methodist Secretary for International Affairs, voiced his concern, saying: "We are concerned at the lack of recourse to due process to challenge such orders given the severity of the measures proposed. The use of house arrest is likely to require a fresh derogation from the European Convention on Human Rights."

This will apply to British citizens and those alleged to be involved in domestic terrorism. People who are accused, along with their lawyer, will not be able to examine all evidence held against them because restrictions on access to evidence will still apply. The control orders will be imposed by the Home Secretary. Amendments proposed in the House of Commons would require the application to be presented to a judge for the lesser control orders.

However, the "reasonable grounds to suspect" threshold has been criticised by Ian MacDonald QC. He pointed out that those held under house arrest would have no right to know what kind of information is held against them or on what grounds on which they have been detained.

"The ability to scrutinise and challenge the evidence is vital if we are to have confidence in the justice of applying such orders," said Hucklesby. "The result of which is still a serious restriction on individual liberty.

"The Methodist Church has urged the government to grant the right to appeal against control orders through the judicial process. It asks the Government to consider ways of safeguarding the liberties of its citizens that do not require derogation from the European Convention on Human Rights."

In another comment, Hucklesby, Methodist Secretary for International Affairs said: "There is a very real danger that undue fear could persuade us to adopt measures that will damage the good record of this country on justice and human rights."

"Laws such as these have major implications for our constitutional rights and warrant a wide discussion and debate beyond the confines of Parliament. Such a debate was suggested by Charles Clarke in January and it is regrettable therefore that temporary legislation is being rushed through the Commons and Lords in such a perfunctory way.

"The balance between civil liberties and effective protection from terrorism is tricky and calls for sober judgement. The Prime Minister stated on BBC radio that there are several hundred people in this country believed to be plotting terrorist acts - a statement not apparently supported by intelligence services. Such statements touch a raw nerve in the our post 9/11 world and there is a very real danger that undue fear could persuade us to adopt measures that will damage the good record of this country on justice and human rights. Terrorism must be tackled on several fronts and rigorous respect for international human rights standards are essential in this endeavour."