SMT Blog: Why the uproar over 42?

• Steve Morgan 12 Jun 08

  Of course Brian Sims completely and utterly msses the point. If they (the police) cannot get the eveidence after 28 days they should either A). go to a judge and apply for an extension B) charge the individual or C) let them go.

  The police will now have the power to use this legislation as they see fit and in the same way that the terrorist laws have been abused and mis-used by local authorities it ill not be long before the police mis-use this. I just hope Mr. Sims is ready in case they detain him!

• Anji 12 Jun 08

  I'm very much NOT in favour of being locked up for six weeks on the spurious evidence of some disgruntled, malicious, rumour-monger. Who would look after my three young children? Who will employ me when its all over and my present employer has already replaced me?

  This is another "emergency anti-terrorist" power - never to be misused - like councils have not misused their new powers snooping on parents living in school catchment areas, or putting the wrong rubbish in the wrong bins...

  The Americans manage to charge their suspects within two days, then they can be held legally. What's so difficult for our police forces that they can't do the same? I'm not suggesting they compile all the casework in two days, just gather enough evidence for a reasonable charge to be lain - at least I'd know what I was accused of!!!

  I'm truly sorry, but if this unenlightened viewpoint is representative of this publication it's time to cancel my subscription.

  Anji

• Ian Watson 12 Jun 08

  The vast majority of law abiding citizens of the UK would willingly accept the 42 day period.

  It never seems to amaze me that every time civil law / liberties is discuss the BBC role out Ms Shami Chakrabati, (National Council for Civil Liberties) who is she anyway. Is she an elected member? Whilst she seems a nice person and has a blinkered view on modern society she was not convincing enough on Question Time last week, left a little wanting.

  It’s a funny old world where the minority have a louder voice than the majority. Surely the recent bi-election result in Crewe & Nantwich gave a clear message to government that the great British public need a change.

  The 42 day period is required for the Police to carry out their role in maintaining order and to make exhaustive investigations required to secure an arrest. The actions of the PPC is an other story.

• jerry maguire 12 Jun 08

  As it happens, I'm not in favour of of summer holiday length of time for individuals who haven't even been charged, but I think it's worth standing back and looking at the situation we're dealing with.

  My dad was a jobbing builder in London in the early 80s. He had a manky old mini van, an untidy look about him, a beard and an Irish accent that, by his own admission, made you sound like you had hot spuds in your mouth, and he fully accepted, when the cops picked him up and questioned him, that under the circumstances, it was entirely reasonable. after all, they had bombs going off all over the place, and every irishman was a suspect.

  I thought it was harsh and repressive. he thought the cops had no choice.

  I wonder if maybe there are more people like my old dad who understand the circumstances than liberals like me.

  Brian might indeed have a point.

• Una Riley 12 Jun 08

  Great article from an anti-terrorist Security perspective...and whilst I agree with you on one hand, remember what happened to Walter Wolfgang!

  He was the 82-year-old member of the Labour Party from London, who was thrown out of its annual conference for heckling! In fact all he did was shout "nonsense" at Foreign Secretary Jack Straw! It was an appalling site to witness the rough handling of that elderly gentleman.

  What if they had decided to keep him locked up for 42 days under the terrorist act for not agreeing with the Foreign Secretary?

  Whilst I agree that the police should have all the time they need to investigate this new terrorist phenomenon that we face in our country. Why don’t we just introduce a ‘fast-track’ process to enable the police to extend the investigative period for prospective terrorists for as long as is required? Or is that too simple?

• Annora Halferty 12 Jun 08

  Maybe I'm being over sensitive, but given the current climate, I don't think that even a 42 detention period is long enough. Since 2001, I have, and will continue to believe that persons believed to pose a threat to UK civilians, should be held for a 12 week period whilst officers accumulate enough evidence to be able to charge them, if this is not enough, THEN apply to the courts for an extension.

  As a council tax paying young woman who is daily reminded of the fragility of life, I believe the UK Police Force are not given ample opportunity to do what they joined the force for - to protect and serve.

  So in answer to the question; Yes, but I still don't think it is long enough.

• security trev 13 Jun 08

  is this the ultimate answer to the ultimate question, then?

• Ron Whittaker 13 Jun 08

  I believe that we need some extra laws with regards to terrorism but, i also believe that they would also need to be examined on a case by case basis, in this way we could reassure the civil liberty movements that we are not having our liberties abused as commented on by other readers, the main point of this legislation is to ensure public safety and this should always be the primary concern.

• Andrew 13 Jun 08

  Whilst the concern about holding suspects without charge for 42 days raises concerns about our civil liberties others raise the fact that the US charges suspects within 2 days.

  We would not need to hold these suspects anywhere near 42 days without charge if the use of wiretap evidence were permissable in our courts. This would be a far better use of parliaments time and give the civil liberties groups something to really argue about.

  I am all for living in a safe environment as I think we all are, but there is already enough legislation to hold suspects without charge so lets give the security forces better weaponry in our courts - if it can be heard and recorded we should be able to use it to prosecute.

• Jim Gibson 13 Jun 08

  I am sorry Brian you have your opinion, but none of us would want to be banged up on remand for 6 weeks without being charged, or perhaps I am just an old softie!

  In many cases laws that are introduced either post to, or in response to serious events and often in haste do not acheive their intended results and may in fact 'back fire' on those who enact them. Don't people remember Internment without trial in NI? Prior to that disaster the IRA (in its many forms) was more like dad's army than a ruthless group of terrorists.

  Then look what happened Internment create a huge repulican backlash and the IRA suddenly got all the support and cash that it needed. It also created a group of young men and women who then led the attacks on the UK at home and abroad.

  I myself served in NI in the late 1970's and early 1980's I was also involved in the aftermath of several IRA attacks in Germany on UK soldiers and families. So before we all go dancing down the road of 'lock them up politics' perhaps a little time for reflection and debate is in order.

  It is not that difficult to unwind the law, we no longer have Internment, but try unwinding a whole community of hatred and mistrust.

  Lets all be honest here most politicians are now so far removed from any reality (many have only ever been in politics) in their Westminster Village and driven by the here and now of event politics that they can't see further than tommorows headlines let alone the effect any such legislation can and will have in the future.

  I say let the police apply for extensions of time on a case by case basis with a judge to decide.

• Richard Hayes 16 Jun 08

  What is the real need for 42 day detention, when the 28 day detention has yet to be used?

  How long before 84 days? Or 168? Or indefinite detention?

  What is of great concern to me is that this measure is not reactionary, but pre-emptive.

  Thanks to the rabid support from the likes of Brian Simms, we can all enjoy legal tyranny in the near future.

  PS. Shami Chakrabarti is not a libertarian.

• Shami Chakrabarti 16 Jun 08

  Brian, I have seen the error of my tiresome libertarian ways. Come and lock me up now!

• Editor's comment

  Possibly not the real Shami Chakrabarti - Ed.

Post your own comment on this story