Forums › Life › Politics, Media & Current Events › Stop and quiz powers considered
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6695685.stm
The government is considering giving police officers across the UK “stop and question” powers under new anti-terror laws, says the Home Office. The proposal, allowing police to ask people about their identity and movement, is among measures being considered by Home Secretary John Reid.
The measure is so far used only in Northern Ireland.
Police elsewhere have to have “reasonable suspicion” a crime has been committed before they can stop people.
Anyone who refuses to co-operate could be charged with obstructing the police and fined up to £5,000, according to the Sunday Times.
Alienated Muslims
Critics including civil liberties campaigners, Muslim groups, opposition parties and Northern Ireland Secretary Peter Hain expressed their concerns about the effectiveness of the proposals.
Peter Hain, the Northern Ireland Secretary, warned that Britain must take care that its anti-terror legislation does not alienate whole communities, such as Muslims.The deputy Labour leadership contender told BBC1’s Sunday AM programme: “We’ve got to be very careful that we don’t create the domestic equivalent of Guantanamo Bay, which was an international abuse of human rights, acted as a recruiting sergeant for dissidents and alienated Muslims and many other people across the world.”
He would wait to see the details of the proposals but insisted they should be clear in balancing civil liberties with protecting people’s security.
‘Popular consent’
William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, told the same programme that the Conservatives would consider the proposals on merit.
“If they are measures that are truly necessary to combat terrorism…then we will support them but these things should be done on a basis of trying to get some consensus across political parties,” said Mr Hague.
The ex-Tory leader warned that the proposals must be “consistent with popular consent” and not “alienate the people we need in the fight against terrorism”.Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg accused the government of seeking a “police state” and warned it would only increase radicalism.
Ahmed Versi, editor of Muslim News, a newspaper for British Muslims, warned that extending police powers would be “counter-productive” to improving relations with Muslims and could drive some towards extremists.
Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said it was essential to separate security issues from the “politics of fear” and warned that ethnic minorities, especially Muslims, were already more likely to be stopped by police.
A Home Office spokeswoman said: “We are considering a range of measures for the Bill and ‘stop and question’ is one of them.”
‘National security’
When it emerged on Thursday that three men suspected of wanting to kill UK troops had disappeared, Mr Reid criticised his political opponents and judges for stopping the use of tougher measures against terror suspects.
He promised new anti-terror measures and told MPs that the government could consider suspending some parts of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) so it can impose tougher control orders.The Home Office would not comment on suggestions the new laws were to be rushed through before Tony Blair steps down as prime minister on 27 June.
Greater powers to remove vehicles and paperwork for inspection are also believed to be part of the measures.
Writing separately in the Sunday Times, Mr Blair said the disappearance of the three suspects under control orders was a symptom of a society which put civil liberties before fighting terror.
The prime minister described this as “misguided and wrong” and said prioritising a terror suspect’s right to traditional civil liberties was “a dangerous misjudgement”.
He said: “If a foreign national comes here, and may be at risk in his own country, we should treat him well. But if he then abuses our hospitality and threatens us, I feel he should take his chance back in his own home country.”
‘Political machismo’
The Sunday Times claims police minister Tony McNulty told Mr Blair the new “stop and question” measures would be “very useful UK wide”.
It quoted a letter sent to the prime minister which said the measures would be “a less intrusive power” than stop and search, which are widely seen as unpopular with the public.
Campaign group Liberty also criticised the proposals and said the police should not have powers to question people “willy-nilly”.
Director Shami Chakrabarti said: “This looks like political machismo, a legacy moment.
“Stopping and questioning anyone you like will backfire because people will be being criminalised.”
:you_crazy:you_crazy:you_crazy:you_crazy:you_crazy
for fucks sake, i hate the way our civil liberties are rapidly disappearing under the guise of “terrorism”.
blair is whinin about how the courts wouldn’t let him deport someone to be killed in his own country, so he wants to effectively murder someone?!
this aint good, not good at all. if this is passed, the cops are havin a laugh if they think they are gettin my name :groucho:
i’m suprised this didnt get more attention! what’s everyones thoughts?
My thoughts are: We are seriously in danger of becoming a police state. It seems our government has adopted the usa’s neoconservative method of using fear to control the populace. How long before we start hearing mp’s using the phrase ” its for your own good”? Its ironic really when the biggest threat to this countries saftey is the muppets in charge trying to spread consumerism around the globe. Give it twenty years and the only people not in prisons will be the sheep who follow the government blindly and have every aspect of their lives controlled by parliment. Anyone who questions the law will be branded a terrorist and locked up in a gulag!
they can bloody well lock me up then :groucho:
in a way the terrorists have won. they have indirectly destroyed our freedom, through the reaction to their attacks.
in a way the terrorists have won. they have indirectly destroyed our freedom, through the reaction to their attacks.
exactly. these laws were about before in 1981 or so, called the Sus (search under suspicion) laws. Society back then was also more closed and mistrusting of other people and cultures.
The social problems this caused eventually sparked off rioting in many major cities.
As you probably know, I’m British Asian and proud to be so – and from my own experience the various ethnic groups in Britain have existed fairly peacefully for at least the last 30 years despite the occasional tensions/riots (far less than other European countries)
it took a lot of work on both sides to get to the stage Britain was at by the late 90s…
But then things started going downhill post millenium (firstly because jobs were being outsourced to other countries), people started getting worried about East Europeans coming in because their nations had been destabilised by America wanting to speed up the path to capitalism there
Then things got worse as the war for oil made people take sides, and you had 9/11 and 7/7..
no one wants to stop or even slow down the consumer society though it seems..
we seem to be back in the 1980s again, I daresay nuclear war will become a threat again soon..
So essentially the extremists and warmongers on both sides have IMO wiped out 25 years worth of social progress.
bag of arse
The sus laws never worked because they gave racist and violent policemen the right to go around harrasing anyone they chose. Eventually the backlash from ordinary people forced them to be stopped. The average policeman is just too thick, prejudiced and a bully to be trusted with that sort of responsibilty. They will just pick on stereotypes provoking violence and ultimately riots like broadwater etc. I always thought it couldn’t get worse than Thatcher. At this rate, in a few years, we are going to think Hitler was a softy.
i was reading just last night an argument that this is not to stop terrorism, but a plan to gain control of the masses in general, as all the problems we are facing, lack of housing, social services, wages being driven down could lead to civil unrest….there has even been talk of issuing tazars as standard…
It comes to something when the police themselves have grave concerns, they are realising themselves they are being turned into puppets for the state.
And yes, i danced in the street when I saw Thatcher go, i look back now and see how innocent and naive I was then…
..
ive got nothing to hide, bring it on!
are you being sarcastic?
Apart from the obviously bad thing that is, what if it was used on someone with a pacemaker, they’d end up being murdered by tazer-fire just for arguing about a parking ticket.
Ah, but they’re evil lawbreakers you see – we have to save the country from the menace of illegal parking….:hopeless:
Kind of depressed by the bit about Blair, but not really surprised by anything he does nowadays – if he can’t understand that we don’t deport people to be executed because state execution is barbaric, and execution by proxy is as bad as doing it ourselves, then there truly is no hope for him….
He’s probably sore about it because he thought it was a cunning loophole to circumvent the laws he is supposed to uphold, and he thought nobody would work out what he was doing….:you_crazy
Did this law ever get passed?
0
Voices
13
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags
Forums › Life › Politics, Media & Current Events › Stop and quiz powers considered