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
Submit your comments on this article
Britain
British anti-terror laws under fire as two terror suspects escape
2006-10-18
LONDON - BritainÂ’s anti-terrorism legislation came under renewed fire Tuesday as a row over two international terrorist suspects who have gone on the run intensified. Opposition parties and pressure groups said that the escape of the pair, reportedly a Briton of Pakistani descent and an Iraqi, highlighted that the control orders to which they were subject were dangerous and unfair.

Control orders are a loose kind of house arrest which usually compel suspects to report regularly to police and place them under a curfew, although critics say suspects should instead be charged and face a trial.

But Home Office minister Tony McNulty hinted Monday that the government may go in a different direction and diverge from the European Convention on Human Rights to tighten up the regime using existing legislation. “We’ve got scope... to look at derogating orders that actually step away from the European Convention on Human Rights. That remains an option and we keep these things under review,” he told BBC television.
Good luck with that Tony, you're in Labour, remember?
And, with a note of irritation in his voice, Prime Minister Tony Blair reminded reporters at his monthly press conference that the government had tried to bring in tougher anti-terrorism powers but was defeated on the issue. “We were prevented by opposition in parliament and then by the courts in ensuring that that was done,” he said.
Join the club, ask Dubya how it feels.
“Control orders were never going to be as effective as detention but of course, we’ve got to make sure that if someone breaches their control order, they’re properly sought after.”

The Home Office has not made public any details of the escapes, but the BBC reported on its website that one of the fugitives was a British man of Pakistani descent suspected of wanting to go to Iraq and fight against the United States and British-led coalition there. He is 25 and escaped from the mental health unit of a hospital in south-west London in the last few weeks, BritainÂ’s Press Association (PA) reported.

The other man is Iraqi and is thought to have been missing for some months, the BBC online said.
Wanna bet he's in either Anbar or Peshawar?
Home affairs spokesman for the main opposition Conservative party David Davis called for a review into the situation, while his Liberal Democrat counterpart Nick Clegg said that the government should be getting more control order suspects into court.

“As we have always made clear, the danger of control orders is that they short-circuit due process and keep suspects in a state of limbo,” Clegg said.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil liberties campaign group Liberty, said the two escapes confirmed that control orders were ”unsafe and fundamentally unfair”. “If someone is truly a dangerous terror suspect, why would you leave them at large?

“On the other hand, it is completely cruel and unfair to label someone a terrorist and to subject them to a range of punishments for years on end without ever charging them or putting them on trial,” she said.
Does this mean you'll allow expeditious trials and have these thugs locked up?
Control orders were introduced last year to replace emergency laws brought in after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States which allowed the government to lock up foreign nationals suspected of involvement in international terrorism without charge or trial. When BritainÂ’s upper parliamentary chamber, the House of Lords, ruled those measures illegal, the government brought in control orders.

Human rights legislation prevented the men from being deported because they faced being sent to countries where they could be tortured or treated badly.
No such sympathy for the bombing victims as far as we can tell ...
In June, a senior judge quashed control orders made against six men, saying they were incompatible with article five of the European Convention on Human Rights, but the government has appealed this ruling.
Posted by:Steve White

#7  The extreme right? In Britain? Is that what we'd call Republicans over here?
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 20:21  

#6  One of the more dangerous features of a democracy {even a democratic republic} is that if the professional political classes in the major parties refuse to do their jobs and protect the public, then a psuedo-populist will arise who will. Often, that individual is a classic fascist/national socialist type, who will scare the pros into action. Unfortunately, with the left/liberal bend of most European major parties, that action will likely be to suppress the psuedo-populists and his/her supporters quite vigorously, and leave the troublemaking group that provide the initial spark alone - in this case, the Islamists. That tends to create a self-feeding loop that eventually results in : 1) the psuedo-populist's party seizing control of the government, or 2) the implementation of a police state to "control the masses' negative urges". Either scenario is possible in Europe right now, although with the EU's anti-democratic bend, the leftist police state seems to have the stronger backing of the politicos.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-10-18 20:17  

#5  SpecOp35,

British Society is relatively successfully integrated - a handful of assholes neeed to be 'sorted out' to maintain order. Unfortunately, too much PC bullshit that comes with a multicultural Britain provides an obstacle to dealing with them appropriately. The current debate in the media on the veil etc. will help us lose the shyness and take action - I fear it will take more atrocities to stir the populace from their slumber. The danger is the extreme right will also take courage from this blossoming debate.
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-10-18 15:53  

#4  Gee whiz, ya mean the Honor System doesn't work with terrorist greaseballs?
Posted by: mojo   2006-10-18 14:43  

#3  Howard UK,
Brits have made a terrible miscalculation letting all those Muzzies in to gain slave labor. Now they go about undermining your laws and culture. Do you foresee a changing in attitude among Brits to stop this nonsense ?
We suffer from this same stupidity here allowing all these illegals in to serve as slave labor. They are destroying everything we have built in culture also..the hospitals, schools. Refuse to assimilate. Refuse to use our language. Now that some are getting into legislatures they are undermining that with their communist philosophy. Some resistance is building here, but not enough fast enough I'm afraid. Same there ?
Posted by: SpecOp35   2006-10-18 11:42  

#2  Human rights legislation prevented the men from being deported because they faced being sent to countries where they could be tortured or treated badly.

F 'Em. If the country on their passport won't take them, give them a raft and matches, give them a sail if they can't get offshore.

Way too much is spent on these homeless terrorists, aim high next time, I say screw this law enforcement as the holy grail solution. They shot "old Yella" they can push unwanted refugee terrorist in the ocean, I wouldn't lose a wink.

.02


Posted by: Dunno   2006-10-18 05:08  

#1  We have the civil liberties mob to thank for this. Shama Chakrabati of 'Liberty' should be placed in The Tower for fighting internment of terrs. She would rather have MI5/MI6 reveal their methods in a court of law and lose the fight on terrorism than round up a handful of scumbags... And the Law Lords allow this buttfunking of the British people. Stop the country I want to get off.
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-10-18 03:26  

00:00