Political Rant #62: 42 Day Detention Without Charge

MPs will today begin a two-day debate in the Commons on the report stage of the counter-terrorism bill, which includes a controversial new measure to extend the current detention-without-charge limit for terror suspects from 28 days to 42 days. Who is opposed to the move? The government's plans have met with strong opposition from within Labour's own ranks, as well as among Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs. Last week the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, announced a range of concessions or "safeguards" in an attempt to win over Labour backbenchers and avert a damaging government defeat. What were the concessions? Although the government refused to budge on the issue of 42 days, Smith outlined a number of "safeguards". These included: • declaring that there is an "exceptional need" to use the power, such as in the aftermath of an atrocity, • authorisation by parliament, possibly within seven days, • judicial review of the use of the power. What were the orginal proposals? Originally, the home secretary would have been able to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days in relation to any ongoing investigation. Though she would be obliged to make a statement to the Commons within two days, parliament might not get a chance to vote on it for another 30. Critics said that was too long a gap. Where did the number 42 come from? In last year's Queen's speech, the government said it was only "considering options" for extending pre-charge detention beyond 28 days. It had previously been pushing for a 30-day increase, to 58 days. Forty-two seems to be a compromise. Why does the government want to extend the detention period? Terror plots are often highly complex and involve international networks, ministers and the Metropolitan police say. Early intervention is crucial, meaning arrests have to be made on intelligence rather than evidence that could be used in court. Collecting computer-encrypted data, carrying out investigations into chemical, biological or nuclear weapons and gathering evidence from scenes of attack are all very difficult and time-consuming. The home secretary said the 42-day limit would apply only in "exceptional circumstances". What would happen under a state of emergency? There can already be a 30-day extension under a state of emergency, which the government is reluctant to call because it would cause panic and boost terrorists' confidence. Has the government tried to extend the limit before? Yes. Tony Blair tried to extend the then-14-day limit to 90 days in November 2005 but was defeated in the House of Commons. The current 28-day limit was a compromise. Who else is in favour of an extension? Sir Ian Blair, the commissioner of the Metropolitan police. No surprise there then.

YouTube | June 10, 2008

Tags:. .democrat. .damaging. .chemical. .extending. .defeated