Monday 2 February, 2004

...and justice for all?

David Blunkett has been let loose again. This time he is proposing new anti-terrorism laws that would make it easier to convict suspected terrorists. He basically wants to forget about the "innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond all reasonable doubt" and change that into "on the balance of probabilities". This would mean secret trials, secret judges, secret defence lawyers, and secret convictions. This, in my opinion, goes against the western justice system where the basis has been - and should be - the principle according to which it's better that ten guilty people are let loose than one innocent person going into jail.

So ok, desperate times need desperate measures - and the issue with suicide bombers is a difficult one because there's never a guilty party that could be convicted afterwards. However, I think Blunkett is seriously starting to behave like these men that he calls evil - if these kinds of laws would be proposed by some of the "axis of evil" countries he would be the first one to complain how unfair they are.

Baroness Kennedy likened him with Robert Mugabe this morning. Other people have described him as wholly unfit to be a home secretary. Civil rights groups have condemned the proposals as "wholly unacceptable".

I say they are understatements.

Posted by kolibri at 2 February 10:08, 2004
Comments
# 1 - Rel Fexive (on February 2, 2004 10:20 AM):

He's blind in more than one way, isn't he?


# 2 - Kolibri (on February 2, 2004 10:30 AM):

I just keep thinking he can't get any worse and then he does.


# 3 - Gareth Lewin (on February 2, 2004 12:22 PM):

Unfortunatly, as one learns living in Israel, no one has yet thought of a good solution to Suicide terrorism.

I'm not justifying Blunkett mind you.


You can't add any more comments, but if you wish you can email the author.