1
   

Protesters demonstrate outside 'Guantanamo UK' jail in Londo

 
 
Col Man
 
Reply Sun 3 Oct, 2004 01:50 pm
Link : http://uk.news.yahoo.com/041003/323/f3td9.html

http://eur.news1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/xp/afpji/20041003/041003171014.zt6nxr9s0b.jpg
Muslims pray outside the magistrates court beside the Belmarsh Prison in London


LONDON (AFP) - Human rights activists protested outside a top-security jail in London where some foreign nationals have been detained without trial for almost three years under controversial anti-terrorism laws.

Dubbing Belmarsh Prison in the southeast of the capital "Guantanamo UK", after the US detention centre for Al-Qaeda and Taliban suspects in Cuba, the several hundred demonstrators demanded the government either charge the suspects or free them.

According to rights groups, a total of 14 foreign nationals are being held in British jails or secure hospitals under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act, passed soon after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.

It allows foreigners to be jailed indefinitely without charge or trial if the home secretary rules they are suspected of involvement in international terrorism, and they opt not to leave the country.

"The use of detention without trial damages the legal system, damages the fight against terrorism and damages Britain's reputation internationally," said Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil liberties group Liberty.

"We need an alternative now that ends this injustice."

The 2001 law, which saw the first arrests soon after it was passed, has been defended by Home Secretary David Blunkett as a necessary measure in the battle against terrorism.

However in August, an influential committee of British parliamentarians said it should be scrapped "as a matter of urgency", while Blunkett has also suffered legal reverses over individual detainees.

In April, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), a tribunal which decides the status of foreign nationals facing detention or deportation on the grounds of national security, ordered that a suspected Algerian terrorist should be released into house arrest due to mental illness.

A month before that, a Libyan national suspected of links to the Al-Qaeda network walked free after SIAC decided he was being detained on the basis of "wholly unreliable evidence".

However in August, Blunkett successfully defeated a court appeal by 10 detainees whose lawyers argued it was wrong to hold them under evidence which might have been gathered using torture or ill-treatment at Guantanamo Bay or the US Bagram airbase in Afghanistan
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 572 • Replies: 2
No top replies

 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Oct, 2004 02:22 pm
The status of Terrorist prisoners held at Guantanamo is certainly problematical. They are not U.S. citizens, were captured during combat fighting against our soldiers and were transferred to a location that has only quasi-American law. The prisoners are not prisoners of war, because they were not fighting as regular soldiers within a national military service. Many, perhaps most, were taken prisoner far from the nations from which they claim citizenship and where they voluntarily went to wage war without the sanction of their native country. They are international outlaws who recognize no national, or international law. So who has proper jurisdiction to try their cases? What punishments and/or imprisonment is appropriate in these unique circumstances?

Many of these prisoners were engaged in either planning, or actually killing U.S. citizens. They were prevented from continuing their murderous attacks by being captured. If they are released, what is to prevent them from again taking up arms against innocent citizens on the streets of New York, or London, or Paris, or within Israel? If there are no consequences of being captured while fighting against our military forces, then the only recourse might be to give no quarter. No surrenders accepted. Of course, that is not going to happen even in someone's dreams. We aren't that sort of culture, even if our enemies are.
0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Oct, 2004 03:12 pm
yeah right..
well i am glad i am not the one who has to make those decisions...
seems to be a 'no-win' situation, in the moral sense anyway...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Protesters demonstrate outside 'Guantanamo UK' jail in Londo
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 02:49:00