4 ms·

I'm glad too, but some of your numbers are a bit off; https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-held-in-custody https://www.gov.uk/arrested-y

by cortic 8y ago

I'm glad too, but some of your numbers are a bit off; https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-held-in-custody https://www.gov.uk/arrested-your-rights/how-long-you-can-be-... Also its worth noting our anti-terror laws seem to allow indefinite detention without charge. And ant-immigration laws allow for long (months even years) detention of migrants, without even suspicion of a crime.

PJDK 8y ago
According to your link, the longest you can be held without charge is 14 days under the terrorism act. The longest ever proposed was 90 days (proposed in 2006), and the longest implemented was 28 days (between 2006 - 2011). https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/countering-terrorism/extended-pre-charge-detention https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/counterin...
- cortic 8y ago
  Terrorism Act 2000 (which was partially ruled unlawful by the House of Lords for what its worth) allows for theoretically infinite extensions to the detention period with only a police superintendent needed to sign off on it. as for imigration 'Just over one fifth of immigration detainees are held for at least two months' : https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/immigration-detention-in-the-uk/ https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/im...
  - PJDK 8y ago
    Have you got a source on that part of the terrorism act, it's not something I've heard of.
    - cortic 8y ago
      http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents more specifically section 29, 1, (d): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/8/part/III http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/8/part/... Though F1 seems to have been edited since i last looked.. still its in theory, unlimited detention without trial. There is also the Terrorism Act 2006, which i think extended the standard limit to 26 days.. Not sure if this was ever repealed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006
pbhjpbhj 8y ago
Surely migrants are "guilty" of not having proper immigration documents, not having a lawful right to remain, and similar crimes? One may not agree with long term detention, nor even with the law in this area but this assertion (that immigrants are being held without due process) appears to be unfounded? What would you change?
- cortic 8y ago
  >What would you change? I would like the presumption of innocence before due process and i would like the due process to involve a British jury. I would like an absolute time limit on detention of innocent people. And if these things made policing or managing immigration more difficult then i can live with that.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Presumption of innocence in the face of absolute proof? If you're a foreign national in the UK without proper documentation you are guilty of a crime; we could change that of course, but you don't appear to want that? I'm not sure restricted immigration can work without that assumption of guilt; the alternative seems like open borders with no controls? If they're innocent then they'll be able to prove it easily ... if they have a valid reason for immigration than despite their crime they'll be released in good time. It seems a small price to pay for freedom if you're fleeing certain harm?
    - cortic 8y ago
      > innocence in the face of absolute proof? this is just childish, you can only establish the existence of 'absolute proof' in a court of law. If you really want some jobsworth to sit in their office and dispense justice, then you don't want justice.

by cortic 8y ago

PJDK 8y ago

According to your link, the longest you can be held without charge is 14 days under the terrorism act. The longest ever proposed was 90 days (proposed in 2006), and the longest implemented was 28 days (between 2006 - 2011). https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/countering-terrorism/extended-pre-charge-detention https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/counterin...

cortic 8y ago
Terrorism Act 2000 (which was partially ruled unlawful by the House of Lords for what its worth) allows for theoretically infinite extensions to the detention period with only a police superintendent needed to sign off on it. as for imigration 'Just over one fifth of immigration detainees are held for at least two months' : https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/immigration-detention-in-the-uk/ https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/im...
- PJDK 8y ago
  Have you got a source on that part of the terrorism act, it's not something I've heard of.
  - cortic 8y ago
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents more specifically section 29, 1, (d): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/8/part/III http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/8/part/... Though F1 seems to have been edited since i last looked.. still its in theory, unlimited detention without trial. There is also the Terrorism Act 2006, which i think extended the standard limit to 26 days.. Not sure if this was ever repealed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006

pbhjpbhj 8y ago

Surely migrants are "guilty" of not having proper immigration documents, not having a lawful right to remain, and similar crimes? One may not agree with long term detention, nor even with the law in this area but this assertion (that immigrants are being held without due process) appears to be unfounded? What would you change?

cortic 8y ago
>What would you change? I would like the presumption of innocence before due process and i would like the due process to involve a British jury. I would like an absolute time limit on detention of innocent people. And if these things made policing or managing immigration more difficult then i can live with that.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Presumption of innocence in the face of absolute proof? If you're a foreign national in the UK without proper documentation you are guilty of a crime; we could change that of course, but you don't appear to want that? I'm not sure restricted immigration can work without that assumption of guilt; the alternative seems like open borders with no controls? If they're innocent then they'll be able to prove it easily ... if they have a valid reason for immigration than despite their crime they'll be released in good time. It seems a small price to pay for freedom if you're fleeing certain harm?
  - cortic 8y ago
    > innocence in the face of absolute proof? this is just childish, you can only establish the existence of 'absolute proof' in a court of law. If you really want some jobsworth to sit in their office and dispense justice, then you don't want justice.