lord of the blog

« Today in Parliament | Main | Terrorism »

Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Terrorism

If you are interested in the continuing debate on terrorism and the problem of legislation then have a look at the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee transcripts of evidence.

Last Tuesday Lord Goldsmith gave evidence and the Tuesday before it was Lord Falkner. Go to http://www.parliament.uk and follow the committee tabs. We were questioning them on the current legislation and the Special Immigration Appeals Court.

I have read some, but not all, of the evidence submitted by Falconer, but couldn't find Goldsmith's evidence. I am not convinced by Falconer's evidence and am disappointed by the Committee's rather benign questioning.

For me, the most crucial issue is that someone held in custody must have the chance to know the accusations against them and to defend themselves. It does not matter whether a judge or a politician imposes these draconian Control Orders, it matters whether someone gets a fair trial. Custody should come with the prospect of a criminal trial. I can't see how this conflicts with the objective of fighting terrorism. If you give up on the right to a fair trial, then you have given up on liberal democracy.

Moreover, I am extremely worried and angry that Blair indicated in Scotland'sSunday Mail last week that he was not going to rule out using Control Orders on anti-globalisation protestors at the G8 summit. Whatever one might think of the anti-capitalist activists, they cannot be regarded as terrorists. The fact that Blair is willing to use this anti-terrorist legislation against them, before it is even past, should be a sufficient enough argument to defeat the Bill entirely.

No doubt, Clive, you will ignore your conscience and vote this through, believing that the government will act with good faith and on the basis of sound intelligence. But given the WMD fiasco and the government's tendency to use police powers to silence peace protestors and Free Tibet activists during Jiang Zemin's visit, there are some of us who are very, very worried about the authoritarianism of the Blair government. Perhaps it is time for regime change at home.

I would also like to ask you what you think of the shoddy treatment of asylum seekers by advocates employed by the Home Office to represent them. I have met several asylum seekers from Iran who claim that people representing them have not bothered to interview them before their hearings, often undermine their case by failing to put forward the correct evidence and even completely failing to turn up to the hearings. How does one go about submitting a memorandum to a parliamentary Committee anyway?