In an op-ed in the London Sunday Times, outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair takes his country's courts to task for impeding his war on terrorism. Blair suggests it is a "misjudgment" to put civil liberties first.
Blair is pushing legislation through Parliament that would give police "wartime powers." If this legislation passes, police will not need to suspect that a crime has taken place in order to require British citizens to stop and answer questions by police about “matters relevant” to terror investigations. According to a companion column in the Times, "If suspects fail to stop or refuse to answer questions, they could be charged with a criminal offence and fined up to £5,000."
Blair's government has been gradually curtailing many civil rights that have been around for centuries and which we, on this side of the pond, take for granted such as trial by jury and the double jeopardy bar to re-prosecution for the same offense.
So tell me Mr. Blair, when your society looks like theirs, who will have won the war?
1 comment:
A bit of a stretch to suggest that these methods would render our society "just like theirs." There is nothing inherently immutable about double jeopardy or jury trials. Indeed, in continental law, many of these procedures we (or at least we lawyers) hold as "sacred and inviolable" are not present, and yet we recognize these countries as in the general mainstream of Western jurisprudence.
In other words, there is no particular reason to make a religion of what are essentially prudential methods which may or may not be particularly relevant in combatting terrorism in the 21st century.
It's hyperbole to claim these changes will render us no better than the jihadis.
nzrew
Post a Comment