Opinions | Columnists
Six weeks is too much time to cop a plea
If the government decides that anyone can be sent to jail for up to 42 days without charge, then it could be the very beginning of the end of all freedoms in Britain.
- By Nicholas Coates, Associate Editor
- Published: 00:05 June 8, 2008
- Image Credit: Diana Chamma/Gulf News
With the British government's attempts to introduce legislation allowing a 42-day detention without charge, the country is in danger of becoming paranoid.
While it is true that there have been increased instances of terrorism over the years, there is no evidence to support the claim that it is necessary to extend by a further two weeks the period in which the police can detain a suspect without charge. It wasn't necessary during the onslaught waged by the IRA, so why should it be deemed essential now?
The extension from 14 days to 28 days is a fairly new phenomenon being introduced following terrorist attacks on London some three years ago. Now, it seems, there are law enforcement officers anxious to extend even further this right.
They claim the time allowed now, 28 days, is in many instances too short to make investigations into a suspects behaviour sufficient to warrant a formal charge and, ultimately, trial.
However, Britain already has one of the longest pre-charge incarceration periods; most have 24 hours, even Russia, that "epitome of suppressed states" has only five days. Why should it be necessary for Britain to think it needs all that extra time?
As it is, 14 days in jail awaiting charges or release is unnerving and can be interpreted as an invasion on human rights.
Is Britain going the way of the US by putting suspects in jail and throwing away the key, as in Guantanamo? At least we know there are people in Guantanamo, even if we do not know their names; allegedly there are also an unknown number of captives of the US of whom we know neither their names nor their location - they are the forgotten people.
Is there a danger of Britain going the same way? It may be so, after all in matters of foreign policy, security and defence, Britain has been following father's footsteps for some time now so it surely won't be long before Britain introduces its "traffic signal" code of warning, the same as Homeland Security.
Already Britain has the most closed-circuit security televisions monitoring the streets, public and private buildings, than anywhere else in the world. And this, despite recent claims by some security experts that CCTV's have made little or no difference to crime levels in the country.
It is not only the issue of the invasion of civil liberties and human rights that come into question, it is the question of whether this is the Britain most Britons want to see.
I will not resort to the cliché "I did not fight in the war to see this happen" - although there may still be some people around who might want to say so - but would instead remind people of the principles the nation has always stood for.
Desperate attempt
From the Magna Carta to the establishment of democracy and parliament, it has been and still is a nation of which Britons can rightly be proud. It is, perhaps, one of the reasons why so many people want to emigrate to the country; it may not be perfect in Britain, but it could possibly be better than immigrants experience elsewhere.
In a desperate attempt to get the 42-day detention legislation through parliament, the British government is making all sorts of compromises which have in many ways watered down the efficacy of the original proposal, at the same time making it a bureaucratic nightmare involving the sanctions of a mixed tripartite of senior personnel.
How enacting the procedures and tying up investigating officers in cumbersome paperwork will help solve terrorist crime is not explained - even to the police, who have already expressed doubts about its effectiveness.
Supporters of the legislation, like supporters of stop-and-search policies and CCTV's at every street corner, inevitably put forward the hackneyed argument, "if you are innocent, you have nothing to fear".
But this assumes there are no corrupt or revengeful police, and that they treat all citizens equally; a huge and dangerous assumption to make, as anyone who has come up against the British police will vouch.
It is very apparent that over the years, because of terrorist attacks, terrorist threats and alleged threats, the British police have adopted an attitude that everyone is assumed guilty until proven innocent - a complete reversal from that which the British public presumed was given as a right.
If the government now decides that anyone can be sent to jail for up to 42 days without charge, then it could be the very beginning of the end of all freedoms in Britain.
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
-
Mosque razing ruling exposes India polity
It would be tragic if those who demolished the Babri Masjid went scot-free
-
All eyes on Obama
Failure to outline an effective strategy at West Point could cost the US president not only victory in Afghanistan, but the White House itself
-
A year after 173 defenceless people were killed
Mumbai itself is far from safe from another deadly attack, even though the level of security consciousness of the average Mumbaikar has been raised since 26/11
