| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Terror suspects detained in Britain lose court bid for freedom |
| 2004-08-15 |
| Britain's government received a welcome boost over its controversial policy of detaining foreign terrorism suspects without trial after a court rejected an attempt by 10 detainees to win freedom. The High Court in London turned down a challenge by lawyers acting for the 10 men against a ruling that Home Secretary David Blunkett had "sound material" to back up his decision they were a risk to national security, and thus should be detained. That ruling was made by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, or SIAC, a secretive legal tribunal which decides on the status of foreign nationals facing detention or deportation on the grounds of national security. The men's lawyers had argued it was wrong to hold them under evidence which might have been gathered using torture or ill-treatment at US detention centres such as Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or Bagram airbase in Afghanistan. However in a lengthy written ruling, a trio of judges turned down the appeal against the SIAC decision. A lawyer for the men, leading human rights activist Gareth Peirce, described the judgment as "terrifying". "It shows that we have completely lost our way in this country legally and morally," she said. "We have international treaty obligations which prevent the use of evidence obtained by torture in any proceedings." The 10, most of whom have been detained for more than two and a half years, have been held under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act, passed soon after the September 11 attacks in the United States in 2001. The law allows foreigners to be jailed indefinitely without charge or trial if the home secretary rules they are suspected of involvement in international terrorism, and they opt not to leave the country. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #2 These people are not the victims here. The reason they are still held is the quaint U.K. law that doesn't allow them to be deported to anyplace they might face ( likely deserved in these 10 cases) the death peanalty. Otherwise they would have been deported 2 years ago. These folks are not the types that would let the average sheeple/folk live safe peaceful lives if given leave to roam about the U.K. at their own leave. Human Rights Lawyers aren't. They will be the day they start defending people who are arrested for illegally enacted laws (like most US firearms laws.) Until then they are tools used by terrorists and other useless scum. You can't have it both ways. Your either support real human rights like the right to the means of self defense or you are a (pick one or more) terroist/commie/facist/racist/nut job tool. As for this off spring of a female dog; she is everthing bad about trial lawyers and more. The BBC loves Gareth Peirce which is enough alone to make me despise this old pruned-up kunt. |
| Posted by: Flamebait93268 2004-08-15 8:12:29 PM |
| #1 Restart the generators. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-08-15 7:38:26 PM |