Opinions | Columnists
Police must be empowered to detain terror suspects
It is only a matter of time before the UK is hit by another terrorist attack.
- By Kevin Scott, Staff Reporter
- Published: 00:08 June 21, 2008
- Image Credit: Illustration by Seyyed De La Llata/Gulf News
It is only a matter of time before the UK is hit by another terrorist attack.
Perhaps it will happen within the next 42 days; a significant timeframe currently dominating the British political scene.
The terror threat is alive and is not set to diminish in the years or even decades ahead. The government, the police and the security services are working harder than ever before to ensure Britain's safety; they are not, as many people observe, 'trying to increase fear levels'. There is no conspiracy, only a very real threat to livelihoods.
But is it possible to achieve a safe and secure society without eroding British freedoms and civil liberties altogether?
David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, appears to think not. He mounted a one-man crusade against Prime Minister Gordon Brown and in particular the government's victory in the House of Commons last Wednesday to extend the length of time that terror suspects can be detained without charge.
Thirty-six Labour MPs joined with opposition parties to reject the 42 days element of the 92-clause Counter-Terrorism Bill. The proposal, therefore, was passed with a slender majority of nine.
A by-election will now be held in Davis' Haltemprice and Howden constituency. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have yet to say whether they will put up a candidate against him. The only person to have expressed an interest in battle is Kelvin MacKenzie, the former editor of the tabloid Sun newspaper; a man who has caused a furore in both Scotland and the northern English city of Hull with xenophobic and insensitive comments.
It is a by-election fraught with difficulties; a clash of two massive egos. Davis is banking on his high-profile political stunt paying off whereas MacKenzie is seeking publicity by pandering to the Rupert Murdoch hierarchy that controls his simple line of thought.
A complex and sophisticated issue such as the 42- day debate raises key questions on both sides. Britain has increasingly been parodied as an Orwellian 'nanny state' over the last few years due primarily to an increase in CCTV cameras and a raging debate over the introduction of national ID cards.
Civil liberties
The '42 days' issue has further stoked the fires of the civil liberties debate and evoked strong opinions on both sides of the argument. The security services and the general public alike are unsure whether it is a 'necessary' piece of legislation. It still faces strong opposition when it reaches the House of Lords and could return to haunt Brown.
Surely the obvious answer is to allow the police and the security services to analyse each individual case on its own merit. In an 'extreme situation' involving a detailed and complex plot the police should have the power to detain a suspect for 42 days.
The main issue at hand is in danger of becoming lost in a haze of political point scoring at a time when everyone should be focusing on the ground realities.
And the ground reality in the UK at the moment is bleak. But not just from the ever-present threat of terrorism. A dangerous knife culture is sweeping the nation and the reality is people living in Britain are far more likely to be stabbed in their home town than blown up on a packed commuter train.
Should suspected knife wielding youths be held for 42 days without charge? Where does it all end?
CCTV culture
CCTV cameras in every town and city centre, the government's controversial DNA database and moves to limit the right to a jury trial have all contributed to a perceived lack of freedoms. Davis is fighting the by-election on the basis of 'insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of fundamental British freedoms'.
But extending the limit that terror suspects can be held from 28 days to 42 will have little or no effect on the ordinary Briton. Some scaremongering from those opposed to the legislation appears to suggest anyone could be held for almost two months without charge.
But in reality this is not going to happen. The police will only detain somebody they believe poses a threat to the nation and only in 'exceptional circumstances' will this period be extended to 42 days.
Britain is certainly one of the more stringent nations in terms of this type of legislation, alongside the US and Greece, compared to countries such as France, Italy and Germany.
But several opinion polls have suggested that majority of the British public is in favour of bringing in the 42 days limit.
Political motives
Questions may be raised about the political motives behind introducing the legislation - there are accusations the Democratic Unionist Party was offered inducements to guarantee its support for the Bill - but the main aim is to protect our freedoms, not to diminish them.
The police deserve all the praise they get. Along with MI5 and MI6 they are currently working on hundreds of plots designed to cause carnage and maximum loss of life on Britain's streets and transport network.
Their cause is not being helped by incompetent civil servants, who twice in the last week have left classified documents - detailing Al Qaida plots and global terrorist funding - on busy commuter trains.
Unfortunately, the police could foil numerous bomb plots but extremist groups only have to be lucky once to inflict huge scale casualties. If top officers think they need 42 days to interrogate suspects in 'exceptional circumstances' they should be supported wholeheartedly.
Share this article
More from Columnists
More from Opinions
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: Cyberbullying
How can we protect our children from being Cyber bullied?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Turkey is thinking creatively
Ankara is seeking peace and reconciliation in the Middle East, but has not turned its back on the West
-
Abdullah may see crisis on horizon
Could it be that the king of Jordan dissolved parliament because he believes a regional war might be in the offing?
-
More action needed to nab murderers
Those guilty of involvement in Philippines massacre deserve the most severe penalty
