WAR: New UK Terror Laws revealed.

New UK terror laws have been revealed today, they include a new ability for the Police in being able to hold Terrorism suspects for up to 90 days without charge.

The article also states that Home Secretary Charles Clarke has already watered down his plan to make glorifying terrorism an offence carrying a penalty of up to seven years' imprisonment.

The draft terrorism bill will be available for public review soon.



Looks like it's going ahead, we just have to hope that the new powers won't be mis-used.
There are not any more details yet of the other proposals, but I'm sure they will be something worth monitoring.
The proposal of a prison sentence for 'glorifying' terrorism is also worrying, they say it is 'watered down' from the initial idea of 7 years, but to what exactly?
What will constitute 'glorifying terrorism' exactly?

[edit on 12-10-2005 by AgentSmith]

What will constitute 'glorifying terrorism' exactly?

that is one of the items in the Bill I do not like. It is too ambiguos and open to interpretation. Only the other day, a senior Sinn Fein MP (forget his name) stated that the IRA campaign was justified as they were at "war". Whilst we may not agree and think they were just murderers, there are many who either agree with that statement or see the guys point. I for one see his point, but do not agree.

Using the power as it stood would enable anyone to have been detained on the grounds of glorifying terrorism, it depends on your definition....Merely voicing support for the palestinians could be grounds for being locked up.....

To be honest though, I haven't read the new proposals, so they may have tightened it up somewhat.

Quite, when these things are broadly described in the media it often makes things sound worse than they really are. But I guess only time will tell, I still find it worrying though.

The problem with holding some one with no charge is that it is wide open to abuse. These men should be charged with atleast something so as to give the defendant something to argue against. How can you argue your innocence if there is nothing to argue against? It is truly arbitrary detention and has no basis in the modern legal traditions of Britain.

If they are suspected terrorists then why not charge them....with being suspected terrorists?? Its not hard!

How new is this law? I know it sounds new, but consider this...

Daniel Day Lewis made a fine addition to his acting resume for his performance as Gerry Conlon in "In the Name of the Father." He was excellently supported by Pete Postelthwaite as his father Giuseppe Conlon.

This FANTASTIC movie was based on the book "Proved Innocent" by Gerry Conlon, about Gerry's time in prison with his father for crimes they didn't commit (they were accused of being in the IRA and blowing up a nightclub).

The entire premise begins with an English law that allowed police to hold people without charge for some extended period of time (7 days, 30 days, who knows?).

So, while the number of days may have changed, I don't think this law is new in spirit.

So, while the number of days may have changed, I don't think this law is new in spirit.

No, the law itself is not entirely "new". Currently, UK police can hold a terror suspect for up to 14 days for questioning at the behest of a magistrate, or longer (as some high profile cases have shown,some up to 3 years) as long as the Home Secretary apporves it.

The fundemental changes proposed in this new law are that this kind of responsibility gets delegated to the police, rather than making the Home Sec responsible, therefore alowing far more people to be detained without the Home Sec having to sign for it.