Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Bad law always remains bad law, Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is one such law, UK Government loses Human Rights Case
















Dear All

Bad law always remains bad law.

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is one such law.

Section 44 allows the home secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances.

Now, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled the Section 44 searches illegal.

Two people, Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton's case was brought before the Strasbourg court who rightly ruled that their Article 8 rights had been violated.

The problem is the Police, they have used and abused section 44 as a right to stop and search anyone on a whim.

Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton were walking in London near an arms fair when they were stopped by Police and searched.

Now, after the verdict the Home Office is considering an appeal rather than fixing the two fundamental problems, rewriting the law and Police abuse.

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is not a vehicle for the Police to use to stop legitimate protest, if anything the responsibility of the Police is to ensure that protestors are allowed to exercise their democratic right in a safe environment.

Lord Carlile, the government's independent reviewer of anti-terrorist legislation said;

"In my view, section 44 is being used far too often on a random basis without any reasoning behind its use”.

And if that is the opinion of the Government’s independent reviewer than it is plainly obvious that the law needs to be redrafted to prevent the abuse that it is current happening by the Police.

Corinna Ferguson, legal officer for Liberty acting for the couple said;

"The public, police and Court of Human Rights all share our concerns for privacy, protest, race equality and community solidarity that come with this sloppy law. In the coming weeks, parliamentarians must finally sort out this mess."

What is unbelievable is that the Government were informed of the problem over years and steadfastly refuse to act in defence of civil liberties.

Why did it take the European Court in Strasbourg to defend our rights when the UK Government should have done so?

Could it be that we live in a corrupt country?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

No comments: