Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor,
Like so many of us, I am increasingly perturbed by this government’s insistence on adding to the number of days that a person can be held in detention in the UK, without charge and without trial.
It is simply not British.
In Canada, they manage with only one day, and the USA, South Africa and New Zealand operate on only two.
Tony Blair, when Prime Minister, demanded this same change but was thwarted by Parliament, who had insisted the increase be limited to 14 days, but finally accepted 28 days.
Last year, in June, Gordon Brown was again pressuring Parliament to increase the period of detention without trial, from the current 28 days, to 3 months (90 days).
The demand for 90 days has been mounted several times by this determined, UK Arm of the EU Government, and had “enlisted” the support of Sir Iain Blair, the Commissioner of the Met Police to press its case.
Continued From Front Page:
Sir Iain Blair, we remember, is the man whose career was once in serious jeopardy, over the unlawful killing of a young man from South America called de Menezez, by his metropolitan police officers, on the excuse that he was a suspected “terrorist”. One can only be left to wonder.
The reason constantly being put forward for the need for the excessive number of days of detention without charge or trial, is, of course, the old chestnut: ‘terrorism’.
I don’t know if readers have noticed, but it seems that our undercover counter-terrorism agents have been doing very well lately, without the need to lock up anyone the government likes for as long as it likes.
Personally, I would rather trust them than Gordon Brown and his EU masters.
Yes, terrorism is indeed nasty, but so is a government, which wants to lock us up, at their will, for as long as they like, without charge or trial.
It is a well known fact that it was the attacks in America on the 11th of September 01, that first saw the publication of this apparently new scramble for powers to lock people up without charge or trial.
However, the framework for such measures precedes 9/11 by at least four years – refer to the EU’s 1997 publication: ‘Corpus Juris’ ISBN 2-7178-3344-7 (penal provisions for the purposes of financial interests of the European Union), article 20.
At the moment, Article 20 of the Code allows for an accused person’s remand in custody for a period of up to six months – renewable for three months – or remand on bail.
Yes, you did read that right.
And we must remember that detention does not require a prima facie case to be presented before any Court of Law, nor is there any presumption of an accused being innocent, as would be the case under British law.
So you know where all this is coming from, don’t you?
Although Corpus Juris was drawn up and the idea mooted at the intergovernmental conference at Tampere, Finland in October 1999, it has never been enacted since the then Home Office minister, Kate Hoey said they would veto it, if presented.
We note that Kate Hoey (one of the few credible NuLabour politicians) was subsequently demoted to the back benches.
People in Britain should note, that in most countries in the EU, 6 months detention without trial has been standard for ever, and the idea of Corpus Juris was to bring that sort of standardisation to all member states.
The danger is that it is happening anyway, thanks to the excuse of ‘fears of terrorism’ and we can expect that the demand for 42 days will, if implemented, be soon followed, again, by a further demand for an increase to 90 days.
“Give em an inch and they’ll take a mile”, comes to mind. Yes, it doesn’t quite have the same impact in ‘metric’, does it?
And indeed, it is accepted that 42 days is but a stepping-stone to a standard 6 months (renewable) required by our masters in Brussels. So we can easily see why they’re sweating all but blood to achieve this goal.
Compliance with Brussels’ requirements is the real reason for 42 days. It is the same reason – compliance, that caused Gordon Brown to renege on the party’s promise of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (the “Not a Constitution” Treaty).
I wonder if they are teaching our children in their schools all this, as they determinedly brainwash them with their apparently innocent CD (The European Parliament – What’s That?) on the glories of the EU.
The CD looks innocent enough when you first start to view it – but if you ever get sight of that CD, remember the information above and then make your own judgement about whether you want to either to teach this one-sidede garbage, or allow your child or children any contact with it.
If I were a parent today, I would be looking with some trepidation, at how any opposition in the European Parliament is constantly being blocked, by doctoring the voting system, deliberately hiding ithe opposing view from cameras and national news reports, or deriding and sneering at it publicly.
I would want to know just what they are so seriously afraid of.
It’s time we governed ourselves.
Tess Nash
Chairman
UK Independence Party
St Ives and the Isles of Scilly Constituency Branch
Sorry, because it has been over a month since this article was posted, additional comments can not be posted.