When we first launched Comment is free's Liberty Central site in January 2009, the threats to individual rights and freedoms looked somewhat different. The Labour government was planning to introduce a compulsory identity card, CCTV was a hot issue and councils appeared to enjoy extraordinary powers to monitor people's activity. On the other hand, some things haven't changed: Jack Straw was describing parts of the Human Rights Act as a "villains' charter", the right to a fair trial was under threat, and there were concerns about the government's plans to gather individuals' details on a database.

It's apt that we've revamped Liberty Central shortly after a small but significant piece of legislation, the Protection of Freedoms Act, entered the statute book on 1 May. This assortment of measures was intended to allay fears about DNA retention, CCTV, police and local authority powers and a number of other infringements of individual liberty (including, and very laudably, the right of men convicted of buggery to have their conviction disregarded). But threats to liberty mutate, and preoccupations change. What about the US-UK treaty that has seen British citizens extradited for trial in the US? Does the phone-hacking scandal make the case for a privacy law stronger? Do individuals still have the right to meaningful protest? Is the bill of rights commission a hopelessly divided organisation, or a serious threat to the Human Rights Act? Should we be able to deport someone for trial in a country where the evidence against him may have been obtained through torture – the ultimate sticking point in the ongoing Abu Qatada saga? And why does the government want to hold more hearings in secret?

We've covered all these issues on Comment is free, but we felt that "Liberty Central" was no longer the best title under which to organise them. First, the Tea Party movement in the US – not a natural ally for the Guardian – has since appropriated the phrase. Second, there's a politically charged tension between the terms "human rights" and "civil liberties". The left, with its (generally) instinctive support for the Human Rights Act, tends to plump for the former; the right, which prefers the language of "responsibilities" and would prefer a bill of rights to the HRA, opts for the latter. Civil liberties are also an important strand of US political debate. Both are key concepts and we've tried to acknowledge them in our new title, Human Rights and Liberties.

We've updated our links to current legislation and campaigning organisations, added links to the latest news stories, incorporated our multimedia content – most recently a video on the latest developments in the Chen Guangcheng case – and a calendar of forthcoming rights-related events (email maya.wolfe-robinson@theguardian.com if you know of one we've overlooked). We're also keeping a special eye on the work of the bill of rights commission. Hope you like the new page – and do follow us on Twitter, where we've changed our name to @cifhumanrights.