5 ms·

Maybe some lawyer can explain to some complete noobie. I thought you always have the right to not answer any questions until you have your lawyer present, and t

Maybe some lawyer can explain to some complete noobie. I thought you always have the right to not answer any questions until you have your lawyer present, and that you have the right to that one phone call to a lawyer. My knowledge comes entirely from movies and novels. I understand that there could be exceptions, but what is the basic rationale of the exception here? The UK is a country of laws, and generally the laws are not absurd. What is the extend of this exception? Can the information they get from you be used in a court of law to incriminate you?

foobarian 3y ago
That's probably very US centric given how much TV comes from there. Does the UK even have a constitution or does the buck stop with the monarch?
- extraduder_ire 3y ago
  The "UK constitution" is a wide set of documents, both laws (some really old) and legal precedent that determine how the country's supposed to operate. The main concept is "parliamentary supremacy", which means that the parliament (house of commons/lords) can pass any law except one that would bind their action in future. Basically, they can pass whatever law they want, and pass a law repealing it later. The expectation is that they wouldn't do anything too heinous because reasons. The idea that the monarch can forcibly disband parliament doesn't really exist anymore. (although, some laws occasionally do get blocked by that apparatus) I learned way too much about this while their high court was deciding on the constitutionality of the process of leaving the EU. I wonder how much of it is baby-duck syndrome, but I love living in a republic.
boffinAudio 3y ago
The exception is that the airport is not a part of the UK sovereign territory, but is rather considered an extra-territorial possession of the UK, akin to a colony, which can be governed separately.
- credit_guy 3y ago
  Thank you. I guess that could be the explanation. Still, it's strange that you could be "detained" and interrogated and not be allowed to see your lawyer, and not have the right to remain silent. In the US I would expect to retain all my rights even if I travel to the US Virgin Islands, for example, even if these islands are not part of any state.
  - boffinAudio 3y ago
    AFAIK, the same is true of the USA: its international airports are extra-territorial possessions in which the USA is not obligated to enforce its human rights agreements ...

foobarian 3y ago

That's probably very US centric given how much TV comes from there. Does the UK even have a constitution or does the buck stop with the monarch?

extraduder_ire 3y ago
The "UK constitution" is a wide set of documents, both laws (some really old) and legal precedent that determine how the country's supposed to operate. The main concept is "parliamentary supremacy", which means that the parliament (house of commons/lords) can pass any law except one that would bind their action in future. Basically, they can pass whatever law they want, and pass a law repealing it later. The expectation is that they wouldn't do anything too heinous because reasons. The idea that the monarch can forcibly disband parliament doesn't really exist anymore. (although, some laws occasionally do get blocked by that apparatus) I learned way too much about this while their high court was deciding on the constitutionality of the process of leaving the EU. I wonder how much of it is baby-duck syndrome, but I love living in a republic.

boffinAudio 3y ago

The exception is that the airport is not a part of the UK sovereign territory, but is rather considered an extra-territorial possession of the UK, akin to a colony, which can be governed separately.

credit_guy 3y ago
Thank you. I guess that could be the explanation. Still, it's strange that you could be "detained" and interrogated and not be allowed to see your lawyer, and not have the right to remain silent. In the US I would expect to retain all my rights even if I travel to the US Virgin Islands, for example, even if these islands are not part of any state.
- boffinAudio 3y ago
  AFAIK, the same is true of the USA: its international airports are extra-territorial possessions in which the USA is not obligated to enforce its human rights agreements ...