The present Government under Gordon Brown is pressing to raise the limit for detention of suspects from 28 day to 42 days as part of the counter terrorist policies. Moreover, there was changed traditional Terrorism Act 2000 to 2006 by adding new offences and changing some of old offences and law in order to improve the ability of the police and security forces to catch and convict alleged terrorists. However, in spite of fact that changes has been made because of government security question, that is always must be in the first place, in comparison with others, there are also negative points of these changes and it has got straight connection on the liberty of each individual in the UK.
Firstly, these changes is provided the removing of the bar on the use of intercept evidence and it is going to be a major factor that is being unable to bring charges in terror cases. This point straight connected to the liberty of the individual in UK; moreover, this feature is disturbing Section 9 of Human Rights, because in the first place a lot of peaceful people might be arrested because of suspicion.
Liberty of the individual might be very limited, because in the first place there is not a guarantee that only terrorist or people who might have connected to terror actions will be suspected. However, according to the fact that the security question of the government must be decided in the first place, there is huge advantage of this point and it will be very effective if government provide special psychology training on identification of strange people that can disturb government security. It is very effective point, because in the first place if a person who has got connection to terrorism will be noted but there won’t be accurate evidence and proves that he is terrorist, police can intercept without such difficulties that it might be before.
Secondly, this reform allows questioning in terror case while routine check. This will allows for a charge to be replaced with a more appropriate offence at later stage. This feature connects to liberty of each UK citizen who might not like to listen questioning about terror case; however, it is necessary to do this questions, because in the first place the result might be achieved very easily, because sometimes it is quiet easy to understand that person is strange and know something and hiding it only through the conversation. It follows that this point is very effective and might be done on a professional level. It is advantage for security, because in the first place police can talk about such things as terrorism without any limitations.
Thirdly, new features are also provides hiring more interpreters to expedite pre-charge questioning and other procedures. It has straight connection on liberty of individual, because in the first place there will be languages limitations and more strictly approach to dealing with suspect whose English is not first language or he/she try to keep secrets and do not show he/she know this language. There will be provided stricter conditions in case of hiring, where the main aim is to pre-charge questioning and other procedures. This point is providing effective approach to dealing with interpreters, because in the first place they might known more than just one language speaker and to ask them, need more serious analysing and it will take more time to ask them adequate, because of foreign languages.
Fourthly, there will be added more resources for police and intelligence service that might help to ask and decide questions more accurate and more carefully. In this case, liberty of individuals will be more condensed, because in the first place additional resources will required more time to check anyone. However, in spite of the fact that routine checks will provide more time, it is effective feature, because in the first place effectiveness is straight depend on resources. It follows that as more resources will be used by police and intelligence service, as more effective and accurate routine checks will be.
Finally, there were made some amendments to existing legislation in Terrorism Act 2006 and added some new offences that limits liberty of UK citizens and increase effectiveness of checking and protection against the terrorism. Firstly, it is allows for the police to search any property owned or controlled by a terrorist suspect, so in this case, there will be disturbed right of peaceful suspect; however, in other hand, this point is very effective in combination of summary checking, because in the first place it is always necessary to deal all cases to its end that providing checking of everything that suspect might have.
Secondly, raising the limit for detention of suspects from 28 day to 42 days as part of the counter terrorist policies, is straight connected on Human Rights and liberty of all UK individuals, because in the first place, peaceful suspect who has got connection to any terrorism, will lost 42 days than is more than 28. However, according to the fact that liberty believes that even such an extreme measure would be preferable to creating a permanent state of emergency, this point will propose more quality checking of suspects. Thirdly, Encouragement of terrorism offence provided that glorification of terrorism is unlawful, and this offence provide limitation of views and opinions of any person in UK.
However, sometimes view and opinion can motivate others, so in this case it will be more secured if no one’s will be glorify such bad and negative thing as terrorism. Finally, Dissemination of Terrorist Publication provided that all sales, loan or other dissemination of terrorist publications. This point is reducing freedom of such people who might provide any publications that might have been connected to terrorism in their work.
This option will reduce freedom of creative people who might do something because of their view or idea, so in this case, they might be suspects. In spite of reducing freedom, this offence provides more serious and respectful feature in today’s society, because in the first place terrorism is not funny issues and in spite of publications, a lot of people might not understand this publications and it can be motivating.
In conclusion, there are a lot of points of providing new counter-terrorism policies that are connected to limitations of liberty of all individuals in UK. A lot of points are disturbing Human Rights Act and freedom of views and opinions of today’s society; however, all points of new counter-terrorism policies are provided more effective approach to deal with terrorism. According to this fact, it follows that Liberty believes that even such an extreme measure would be preferable to creating a permanent state of emergency and, in spite of disturbing individuals’ liberty, security question must be provided in the first place and people must understand that everything is done because of their security and their country.