header-logo header-logo

12 June 2008 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

A very British coup

Effective policing, not repressive legislation, has saved the country in the past, says Geoffrey Bindman

The response of our current government to terrorism is nothing new. But history shows that repressive legislation is not always the answer.

When revolution erupted across the Channel in 1789 fear gripped our rulers. Rumours of armed insurrection were rife and government spies added to the panic with exaggerated reports of secret training camps and the illicit manufacture of weapons. Prominent advocates of democratic reforms were arrested and put on trial for treason. When juries refused to convict new laws were introduced to restrict public meetings and publications critical of the government. After the Napoleonic wars there was more unrest. Many who stayed at home had profited from the war but the returning soldiers had no work and radical ideas again took hold.

The Six Acts

In 1819, the government introduced harsh new laws, the “Six Acts”, which prohibited possession of weapons by civilians, introduced wide search and seizure powers, restricted public meetings, increased penalties

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

Payne Hicks Beach—Flora Hussey

Payne Hicks Beach—Flora Hussey

Private client department announces partner hire

Blake Morgan—Daniela Smith & Lee Fisher

Blake Morgan—Daniela Smith & Lee Fisher

Firm appoints first joint heads of Wales office

Ogier—Heidi Sandy & Farrah Sbaiti

Ogier—Heidi Sandy & Farrah Sbaiti

Global dispute resolution team promotes two partners in Guernsey and Cayman Islands

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll