header-logo header-logo

14 June 2007 / Jago Russell
Issue: 7277 / Categories: Opinion , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Less free and less safe

The Bush-Blair “war on terror” has left us with a raft of bad laws, says Jago Russell

With just a few days to go before Prime Minister Tony Blair and Home Secretary John Reid step down, are there any signs that Gordon Brown may drop the political machismo that has characterised talk on terror? One thing is certain: Home Office ministers, the Home Secretary and Brown have been falling over each other in the rush for headlines on terrorism.

The latest flurry of counter-terror proposals started over the last May Bank Holiday when Home Office Minister Tony McNulty mooted the idea of new “stop and question” laws. The proposal to fine people £5,000 if they refuse to identify themselves to the police or to answer questions caused a public outcry. The government was warned that this could be as damaging to community relations as the old “sus” laws. Thankfully, after a Cabinet revolt, the proposals were withdrawn.

But the tough talk didn’t end there. Five days before the Home Secretary was due

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher boosts structured finance practice with appointment of Will Sharp

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke grows its life sciences team with new partner hires

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal expands corporate team with twonew appointments

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll