UK: 42 Day detention without charge

[Undesired Walrus]

I think it's a terrific idea. Gordon Brown is clearly very clever, as he knows that we keep going at this rate, and we will have no liberties for the terrorists to destroy at all *touches nose*!

 

[Puppycow]

Yes. yes yes. 42 is the most perfect number! And its still a lot shorter than forever! If they complain, point to Gitmo.

 

[tkingdoll]

I was amused and horrified today listening to the radio. I hope the members of the public they'd picked for comments aren't representative of the general understanding of how the law works.

One woman (who was actually against the 42 day proposal) said

"28 days is more than long enough to create evidence".

Er...

 

[richardm]

I'm not quite clear on why even more extra time is needed. It seems to me that either a) There is evidence that someone is a terrorist and therefore should be arrested and charged or b) There is no evidence that someone is a terrorist and he should not be arrested. If we suspect he might actually be a terrorist really, we can keep an eye on him until we do have the evidence to return to step a).

Is a month not long enough to gather enough evidence to charge someone? How, exactly, is banging someone in chokey for an extra fortnight supposed to help? Or another 62 days, which is what the original proposal was for. It all starts to have a whiff of internment, which worked terrifically well in Northern Ireland.

Besides, even if it does scrape through the commons, the Lords will never stand for it and even if they did the UCHR would bat it into the long grass.

It's all a waste of everybody's time and energy. My only hope is that the government loses and Gordon Brown gets handed his cards

 

[I Ratant]

...
One woman (who was actually against the 42 day proposal) said

"28 days is more than long enough to create evidence".

Er...

.
No, honey, it can takes years.. look at the aforereference to Gitmo.

 

[Darat]

Well the Yays won.

Sad day.

 

[albion]

People will be held without charge for over a month all because Brown is so desperate to appear tough. It really sickens me the depths to which the modern Labour party has sunk. Fifty percent careerist lackeys and fifty percent moral cowards.

 

[Macoy]

Not unexpected, but what a bunch of cowardly reneging bastards.

 

[Big Les]

Holy Xenu. Really??? I obviously haven't been paying enough attention, because I thought there was no chance of this happening what with the uproar over the last effort.

Ridiculous.

 

[albion]

One said he had wanted to keep the pre-charge detention time limit at 28 days, but had switched his vote to extend it to 42 days to "save" the prime minister.

"I support him and I think he would be on his way out if he had been defeated on this," said Labour's Austin Mitchell.

Yahoo Uk

Call me crazy but if I was supporting legislation which is so egregious that it is opposed by the Tories (!) on civil liberties grounds I'd keep quiet about it being purely for political gain. Shameless.

 

[SezMe]

There's no link to what this thread is about but I presume that the UK has extended from 28 days to 42 days the period that someone can be held without charges being filed. There have been no links to arguments pro and con but I suspect a pro argument could be that finding links of terrorism may well involve getting other countries in the loop and that takes a lot more time.

 

[Uzzy]

Thankfully the House of Lords will tare this farcical bill to shreds. Go them!

 

[Darat]

There's no link to what this thread is about but I presume that the UK has extended from 28 days to 42 days the period that someone can be held without charges being filed. There have been no links to arguments pro and con but I suspect a pro argument could be that finding links of terrorism may well involve getting other countries in the loop and that takes a lot more time.

Nope - it takes that long to check out these new-fangled "computers*"....




*Slight exaggeration for rhetorical purposes but only slight, see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7448066.stm

 

[Fiona]

Sad day. It is not comforting that the lords will perhaps refuse to endorse this. For a long time now our civil liberties seem to depend on an unelected house. The irony: it burns

 

[richardm]

finding links of terrorism may well involve getting other countries in the loop and that takes a lot more time.

But if you don't have any evidence of links to terrorism, why are you arresting the person?

In two out of the three instances where people were charged late, the evidence eventually used was available at 4 days and 12 days respectively.

The above quote is from someone opposed to the change in the legislation, although I daresay it could be used as a pro argument as well - "See, we had the evidence, but it took us weeks to realise it!". Depends on whether you think eroding civil liberties in order to compensate for police inadequacy is worth it, I guess. It may also be worth noting that out of the hundreds of people charged with terrorist offences, it was only "necessary" to charge three of them outside the 28 day limit.

 

[Darat]

But if you don't have any evidence of links to terrorism, why are you arresting the person?

Because they could have some link of course!

Shesh - haven't you been following the debate regarding this? They've made it very clear that this power will only be used when absolutely necessary, such as when Mr Patel from the Newsagents looks a bit guilty getting into his car.

 

[richardm]

I saw him down at the garden centre last week, and he was buying some lawn fertilizer

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Notice that the government only scraped through with the help of the Unionists. They decided to vote for it when Brown assured them that the new law would apply to catholics as well as asians....

 

[Darat]

Given that apparently if you are held under the legislation but not subsequently charged you will receive an ex-gratia payment I am wondering if 6 weeks food and lodging and a nice cash sum at the end of it may be worth some investigation.... lets see Google search for "bulk supplies of hydrogen peroxide and ....."

 

[MarkCorrigan]

The lords can't do a thing, really.

They can refuse to pass the bill, but unless there is a big change in government, the bill will just be forced through.

The Lords have virtually no power anymore.