Repeal All UK Terrorism Laws, Says UK Government Adviser On Terrorism Laws
from the outbreak-of-sanity dept
It's become a depressingly predictable spectacle over the years, as politicians, law enforcement officials and spy chiefs take turns to warn about the threat of "going dark", and to call for yet more tough new laws, regardless of the fact that they won't help. So it comes as something of shock to read that the UK government's own adviser on terrorism laws has just said the following in an interview:
The Government should consider abolishing all anti-terror laws as they are "unnecessary" in the fight against extremists, the barrister tasked with reviewing Britain’s terrorism legislation has said.
…
the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, argued potential jihadis can be stopped with existing "general" laws that are not always being used effectively to take threats off the streets.
As the Independent reported, the UK government's Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Max Hill, went on:
"We should not legislate in haste, we should not use the mantra of 'something has to be done' as an excuse for creating new laws," he added. “We should make use of what we have."
Aside from the astonishingly sensible nature of Hill's comments, the interview is also worth reading for the insight it provides into the changing nature of terrorism, at least in Europe:
Mr Hill noted that some of the perpetrators of the four recent terror attacks to hit the UK were previously "operating at a low level of criminality", adding: "I think that people like that should be stopped wherever possible, indicted using whatever legislation, and brought to court."
This emerging "crime-terror nexus" is one reason why anti-terrorism laws are unnecessary. Instead, non-terrorism legislation could be used to tackle what Hill termed "precursor criminality" -- general criminal activity committed by individuals who could be stopped and prosecuted before they move into terrorism. Similarly, it would be possible to use laws against murder and making explosive devices to hand down sentences for terrorists, made harsher to reflect the seriousness of the crimes.
Even though Hill himself doubts that the UK's terrorism laws will be repealed any time soon, his views are still important. Taken in conjunction with the former head of GCHQ saying recently that end-to-end encryption shouldn't be weakened, they form a more rational counterpoint to the ill-informed calls for more laws and less crypto.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: extremism, max hill, terrorism, terrorism laws, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Similar comments have been made here
But as been observed here and in the UK, the politicians are terrified little children. None of them have any courage whatsoever. Their entire actions show that they have submitted totally to the "terrorist" and the "terrorist" has won.
No wonder we now see little tinpot dictators shoving major countries around. They know they can get away with it because the leaders of the major countries are terrified little dears who haven't a single vertebrae amongst them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Similar comments have been made here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Similar comments have been made here
Terrorism is the excuse to sucker the idiot citizens into giving up their liberty and privacy so that they can be better oppressed.
We march like lambs to the slaughter!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Similar comments have been made here
And you're right in there with them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Similar comments have been made here
>> have any courage whatsoever.
I suspect this is more about 'know your audience'. They are experts at creating outrage and fear, and then farming it for votes. Voters are getting exactly what they demand - ACTION!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Similar comments have been made here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Similar comments have been made here
So what or who is the "terrorist"? It is that of which they are afraid and run in fear from. I don't care if it is the citizens who with careful thought would remove them from power, or the foreign governments to which they have given up the national sovereignty or to the corporations both national and foreign that have bought them or the the tin-pot creepy person who threatens disaster for them. They have no backbone, they have no courage.
Their fear is a blight upon the nations and infects those who won't, will not or cannot think past the bogeyman. They are afraid of the bogeyman and so in turn become the bogeyman themselves.
Everything they do is in fear and so in fire will our nations go. The laughable thing is that it doesn't matter what political stance they take, they all quake in their jackboots, shoes and high heels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr Hill got it wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mr Hill got it wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That phrase really sticks in my craw... any politician (or government official in general) to ever utter those words (or any reasonably similar facsimile) should be IMMEDIATELY arrested and every decision they've ever made scrutinized under a microscope.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Works every time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does not matter, they are here to stay.
And they will never get removed no matter how many other laws exist to do the same thing, because no politician will want to be accused of being "the terrorist's friend (TM)".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does not matter, they are here to stay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We should not legislate in haste, we should not use the mantra of 'something has to be done' as an excuse for creating new laws
I believe "it comes as something of shock" is just about the most culturally context-appropriate choice of words I've seen in quite a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]