You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Britain
Tougher anti-terror laws provoke protests
2004-02-03
Plans to toughen Britain’s anti-terror laws provoked condemnation from rights campaigners Monday, as passengers faced a second day of disruption after transatlantic flights were cancelled in a security clampdown. Home Secretary David Blunkett was branded a “shameless authoritarian” by a fellow member of the ruling Labour Party over his scheme to make it easier to convict terrorist suspects. Criminal courts currently must be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt” that a suspect is guilty before convicting, but under Blunkett’s proposed changes prosecutors could merely have to show a person is guilty “on the balance of probabilities”. Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government hopes to see the tougher law adopted before the next general election, which must be held by 2006. Blunkett has said he favours the possibility of terrorism trials being held partly in secret, with certain elements not being communicated to the defence, so as to protect British intelligence sources. He envisages setting up a group of anti-terrorist judges who alone would be entitled to examine information considered sensitive to national defence and which would not be made public.

Baroness Helena Kennedy, a Labour peer who sits in the House of Lords, compared Blunkett to Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe. Blunkett “really is a shameless authoritarian,” Kennedy told BBC radio. Kennedy suggested it was untimely to propose convicting suspects on the basis of intelligence material at a time when Britain’s intelligence services face criticism over the failure to uncover weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
I guess she doesn't really believe that Britain's at war. Even without any aircraft being flown into British landmarks, there's still that declaration of war by the Bad Guys. Perhaps she should read it.
Posted by:Fred Pruitt

#10  Well, Aris, the downside for possible terrorism trials is that the perps might go boom.

And who you going to call to find the masterminds?

Funny thing, tho, is I've never really seen a trial in the US where the defendant is in a cage.
Posted by: Anonymous2U   2004-2-3 11:28:35 PM  

#9  Damn--Shipman sounds like the apologist for our speaking in tongues, religious nut Attorney General a/k/a Ashcroft who lost an election to a dead man and has devoted his career to wiping his ass on the Bill of Rights
Posted by: NotMike Moore   2004-2-3 11:09:30 PM  

#8  Am too young for such unhappy experiences in Greece, thankfully. But that doesn't mean I can't learn from history.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-2-3 8:49:56 PM  

#7   turn prosecutors and judges into effective dictators who will be able to conduct secret trials, condemning people using information that they'll be claiming to have but we wouldn't be able to actually know about.
An unhappy experience Aris?
Posted by: Shipman   2004-2-3 6:41:17 PM  

#6  Anonymous2U> Yes, let us hope. And let us hope also that my country doesn't ever go back to secret trials and removing the presumption of innocence from defendants, because we've had some bitter experience of *that* as well, and if I have to choose between terrorists and dictators, I'll take the terrorists, thank you very much.

Atleast the Islamic terrorists wouldn't be pretending to be acting for my benefit.

Shipman> Oh, I feel quite worried indeed. But frankly it's not the *judicial process* that's worrying me, not enough anyway that I'd feel we should reform it and turn prosecutors and judges into effective dictators who will be able to conduct secret trials, condemning people using information that they'll be claiming to have but we wouldn't be able to actually know about.

Raptor> No, it wasn't the IRA that took down the Twin Towers. And it wasn't terrorists of any sort that took down Greek democracy. So frankly I'll be just as protective of democratic institution and civil liberties, thank you, and I WON'T bend over for authoritarianism just because I have terrorism in my face.

I hope that UK doesn't bend over either.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-2-3 3:31:09 PM  

#5  Aris pointed out a couple of days ago that often when something good happens in his neighborhood things are bound to go downhill. Sort of a reverse it's always darkest right before before the storm hits and the lights go out and the baby dies.
So Aris how do you feel about the Olympics?;>
Posted by: Shipman   2004-2-3 3:12:07 PM  

#4  In wasn't the IRA that took down the Towers,Aris.
It's not the Provos slaughtering people all over the world,Aris.
Posted by: Raptor   2004-2-3 2:25:42 PM  

#3  Aris, the Summer Olympics are coming to Athens soon, aren't they? And they're a lot bigger than the Winter Olympics, might be kind of harder to protect. Let's hope your country doesn't see up close and personal the difference between the Irish and Islamic terrorists.

Of course, there were those 3 Irish who were caught in Colombia. And I thought the IRA is starting to work w/other organizations?
Posted by: Anonymous2U   2004-2-3 2:24:52 PM  

#2  "I guess she doesn't really believe that Britain's at war."

Whether at war or not, I don't see any excuse on having people condemned on the "balance of probabilities" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt".

And Britain has been at war with terrorists in the past, aka the IRA. I don't see why Islamic Terrorists are so much more dangerous than Irish ones that you need to overthrow the whole basis of your legal system.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-2-3 11:37:39 AM  

#1  "Kennedy told BBC radio"

Is it the name, or are the lefties still not convinced that comparing western leaders to shitty 3th world dictators is, to put it mildly not a winning strategy?
Posted by: Evert Visser   2004-2-3 8:56:03 AM  

00:00