The anti-terrorism bill was passed yesterday - but legislators feared loopholes may have gone unnoticed as it was rushed through Legco. Independent legislator and barrister Audrey Eu Yuet-mee condemned the government for forcing lawmakers to 'carelessly pass' the law. 'Passing this bill was actually a lousy show. Fulfilling our international obligations this way will definitely make it an international joke,' she said. Rejecting claims that the legislation was rushed through, Secretary for Security Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee accused some lawmakers of not taking part in scrutiny of the bill. 'The government is also unhappy with the scrutiny of the bill, not because of the lack of time, but because we only heard one voice . . . Although human rights and freedom are important, we also want to hear other views,' she said. After three months of scrutiny before the Bills Committee and an 11-hour debate spanning two days, the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance was approved by 32 votes to 18. The bill was passed with support from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong, the Liberal Party, Hong Kong Progressive Alliance and most non-affiliated members. Most opposition votes were cast by pro-democracy legislators. They argued a number of provisions in the bill, such as the power for the government to freeze funds of terrorists, mandatory reporting of suspected terrorist properties and making it an offence to recruit or work for terrorists, could trap the innocent. Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, who represents the legal sector, said: 'It has never happened before. We passed a bad law now with improvements to be made in future. This is a bad precedent.' More than a dozen amendments she had moved were defeated. Democratic Party leader Martin Lee Chu-ming accused the government of rushing through the bill to comply with UN requirements. 'The bill should be called the 'carelessly entertaining the UN bill',' he said. Officials had warned the SAR could have faced sanctions if it had acted slowly in joining the international crackdown on terrorism following the introduction of a United Nations resolution late last year in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. While conceding shortcomings and technical problems, Mrs Ip denied the bill was 'careless' and would curb human rights and civil liberties. 'I don't think these allegations are true at all . . . We still have other work to do to implement other UN conventions,' she said, adding the government would make amendments in the next legislative year. Under the law, the chief executive will be empowered to name a person as a 'terrorist' with court approval. An act of terrorism is defined as the use of, or threat to use, violence to cause serious damage to lives and property to compel the government or intimidate the public for political, religious or ideological causes. The secretary for security will have the power to seize funds and property if she has reason to believe they are linked to terrorism. Any person convicted of supplying funds, financial services or weapons to those they know or have reasonable grounds to believe are terrorists would face a maximum of 14 years' jail. People can claim compensation from the government for being wrongly branded terrorists, but a court has to be satisfied authorities have made blunders.