Imprisonment without charge ... ever justified?

by Simon 29 Replies latest social current

• 

  Simon

  Is this ever a good thing? Even if people imagine that its justifiable does it ever have the intended effect? Experienced officers from Northern Ireland describe the internment without trial there as the biggest recruiting sargeant for the republican movement and a big mistake by the UK government.

  Are countries who want to take this like being fools? I think it "looks good" to voters but does not have the desired effect and the people responsible ALWAYS end up looking like the bad guys ... because they are. History is the best judge and it has never judged this kind of blatently unfair action well.

  Compare it with Spain who decided that they needed NO new powers after the Madrid bombings and that having a free and fair democracy was the best response to those who would try to destroy it.

  Surely destroying it ourselves is just pandering to terrorists and giving them exactly what they want? What could be better than having the elected government persecute their own people?!

  I hope the UK does not fall for the comic book rhetoric and follow the US in it's misguided path that can only backfire.
• 

  IP_SEC

  My simplton feeling is that it is never justified.
• 

  lawrence

  Simon- look to the American Indians and see how they were treated, and still are by those who raped and plundered their land. Hitler learned from the US Government how to deal with the "Indian Problem." Therefore, in my opinion, anyone who looks to Washington for direction is screwed from the get go. Then again, Bush, Cheney, et. al. can proudly say, "we made our money the old fashioned way - we stole it!" One more question for the "Christian" killers, where is their old buddy Noriega? He still can't be found...
• 

  Pleasuredome

  i agree with you simon, but the truoble with spain is that that they're all to willing to hand over their "free and fair democracy" to a centralised facsist state called the EU.
• 

  Golf

  Lawrence, Noreiga is in jail, its that other desert wanderer that still at large. He's probably living in the basement of the White House.
  
  American Indians were 'not' considered people so it was ok to kill and steal their land.
  
  
  Golf
• 

  blondie

  I don't think all people in the US, or even most are happy with people being imprisoned here or elsewhere without being charged. Several groups and individuals in the US are fighting this. I agree that since 911 some individuals in government have played on the fears of the public.

  I see this same fear has had fruitage in the UK.

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4860122,00.html

  http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15285696&method=full&siteid=89488&headline=blair-cuts-deal-on-anti-terror-laws-name_page.html

  The Washington Post stated in part the following today in regard to holding people indefinitely and I think it reflects the feelings of many people in the US.

  But the government's handling of this case has been lamentable and self-defeating from the beginning. Its initial contention that it could hold Mr. Padilla indefinitely, giving him no chance to rebut any charge or consult with a lawyer, shocked the conscience of anyone devoted to liberty.

  But he remains a citizen held without formal criminal charges under a legal theory not used since World War II. Mr. Padilla's intelligence value has been exhausted, and the government has had a long period in which to formulate a criminal case against him. Legalities aside, there is no longer any plausible reason to hold him in this troubling status. The government should charge him or release him.

  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28515-2005Mar11.html

  I am confident that most people on JWD understand the difference between government policy and individual beliefs. I am confident that there are still people in the US like those who rose up and stood against McCarthy in the 1950s, McCarthy and his cronies who used the fear of communism to try and undermine the basic rights under the law of the average citizen.

  Love, Blondie
• 

  Englishman

  If someone is suspected of being a terrorist, yet there is no proof, then imprisonment is not a good option. It's not necessary either. Obviously, you can't allow a suspected terrorist leeway to commit crimes but you can't punish him on a suspicion. Plus, a government could use suspicion of terrorism an excuse for them to lock up anyone who doesn't quite fit in with them.

  I guess electronic tagging of terrorist suspects is a reasonable compromise. Somehow, I don't think that there is an ideal solution to suit everyone though.

  Englishman.
• 

  dh

  imo, in a society of laws and rules, imprisonment without charge should NEVER be legal.

  i think trying to pass a bunch of new rules and saying it is to fight terrorism is a joke, it is just the governments trying to get a stranglehold on us as people, to control us.
• 

  minimus

  "EVER" justified?? I dunno. I'm not comfortable with imprisoning anyone without a charge----merely a suspiscion. If a suspected terrorist was detained for up to 72 hours, I could see that as fair---if there was a legitimate allegation with foundation.
• 

  BrendaCloutier

  There is currently a case where an American was picked up at an American Airport, on US Soil, and has been detained as a suspected Al Quaida or other Terrorist for 2 years without access to legal representation, nor have charges been brought against him. Those picked up and detained on non US soil are not subject to the Constitution of the United States, according to the Government of the United States!. However, this man is subject to US Laws, and so is the Government. This is all in the name of Bush's Homeland Security policy. Bad stuff!

  I do not believe that in illegal detainment for ANY reason. Reeks of a dictatorship!