42 Days… No… No… No…
Cross Posted From My Scottish Sketch Political Commentary Blog.
“While there has been a limited number of cases in Scotland which were investigated in terms of the Terrorism Act 2000, I am not aware of any case where an extension of the period beyond 28 days would have been required. “I therefore share the view of the DPP (Director of public prosecutions) Sir Ken MacDonald and the former Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, that the requirement for an extension to the current 28 day is not supported by prosecution experience to date.”
Scottish Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini
“For our part as prosecutors, we don’t perceive any need for the period of 28 days to be increased. Our experience has been that we have managed comfortably within 28 days. We have therefore not asked for an increase in 28 days. It is possible to set up all sort of hypotheses … Anything is possible – the question is whether it’s remotely likely. …prosecutors were “better placed” than the police to judge whether or not there was sufficient evidence to charge a suspect.
Director of Public Prosecutions Sir Ken MacDonald
Lord Goldsmith… repeated that he would have resigned if the Government not previously withdrawn its proposals when he was its chief law officer. “I was opposed to 90 days: contrary to what some commentators have said I never supported 90 days – as was clear inside Government and actually known outside Government too – and would have had to resign if the original 90-day proposal had come to the Lords for a vote.”
(Former) Attorney General Lord Goldsmith
Gordon Brown’s almost religious fervour to have 42 Days on the books (or at least have Conservatives voting against a ‘anti-terrorist’ measure, has now been thrice denied. It remains for a handful of Labour MP’s to stand behind their country, rather than their ‘leader.’
PS: Today is the vote on the changes to the Coroners system, which allows the Home Secretary to over-ride any decision and appoint his or her own choice of Coroner, and to label an inquiry as ’secret’ and censor the publication of the outcome. That alone should make you worry, but at the same time it can also be applied retrospectively to existing cases. Can anyone think which tube station this might be used in conjunction with?
June 10, 2008; Links to my Articles;
If this is your first time here, why not consider subscribing to my RSS feed?
Comments
3 Responses to “42 Days… No… No… No…”
Leave a Reply
I am utterly ashamed of the evil being done in our name by this authoritarian, conservative, Friedman-esque “Labour” government.
Frankly, we need a fucking revolution. I just had a shameful reply from my MP on lobbying him over 42 days. He sent me a government-drafted form response and then got upset when I accused him of being a lapdog (which I put substantially more tactfully).
Get your independence quickly, so I can flee this fascist shithole, eh?
Agreed re Labour – think how worse though if Brown HAD went for an Oct 07 election and got the 30-40 majority he might have managed… 5 years of this. Still a good chance May 09 is on the cards if it all goes tits up. As to independence… who knows, but I’m pretty sure we’ll get the vote about it in 2010/2011. The result is up in the air.
Oh absolutely. The problem is our voting system and our party system mean we are *not* a democracy. Most voters stand no chance of making *any* difference.
Which, of course, means that we’re stuck with Brown or Cameron. I’d rather have neither Tweedledum nor Tweedledee, thanks.
I’m under no illusion that the Tories would have been a lot better (though I’m hopeful that they would’ve been at least a little better on some of the attacks on civil liberties), but I wish people would stop claiming that New Labour are much better than the Tories. Aside from some very early wins — civil rights, human rights, devolution — almost everything they’ve done could have been done by a wholly Friedman-following Tory government.
It makes me ashamed to be British, frankly.