Control orders and due process
July 7th, 2006 by Stephen
Ministers must wait to hear whether an unfavourable High Court ruling on the use of control orders for terror suspects will be overturned.
One would think, listening to Tony Blair and his cronies, that the problem of terrorism is something new to this country, and that never before have we faced the problem of dangerous people willing to cause harm in the name of some idealism that masks the wickedness of their actions.
I suppose Blair has never been to a Guy Fawkes party. Although being a politician, you would think he had some understanding of the gunpowder plot.
There is nothing new under the sun, and Islamic terrorism is not really anything new. So why then are we subjected by attack after attack on hundreds of years of civil liberties that have accrued to the people on the grounds that the political government is itself less a terrorist than an essential means to govern a free people.
Why is their any debate over whether due process should be denied to people suspected of terrorism. If there is evidence of a crime, let them be prosecuted. If there is no evidence, then they are innocent until proven guilty, and should have their liberty.
If we do not accept this principle, how long until we start locking up some other part of our society in similar circumstances? We could start with paedophile suspects. The public will accept it, even if we cannolt prove that these people have done anything wrong. Then it could be animal rights activists, and then we could turn on Scots, say - or postmen. Maybe with a few more steps between, but once we compromise on due process we no longer have a safeguard against facism.
And that too is not a new problem
Get rid of the control orders. Innocent until proven guilty.
