|
|
Translate:
              ‘Terror’ asset-grab absurd and unjust
Friday, April 25th, 2008
ANTI-TERRORISM legislation drawn up by Gordon Brown to allow the Treasury to seize assets from suspects has been ruled unlawful by a High Court judge. The practice, which was dubbed “Britain’s financial Guantanamo” by campaigners, was condemned by the judge as absurd and unfair, breaching the human rights of individuals. Mr Justice Collins said asset-freezing sanctions, introduced by Mr Brown when he was chancellor, had a “drastic” impact on the lives of the suspects. “Since the possible penalty on conviction is severe, the concerns are understandable and the effect on the applicant and his family, whose human rights are also in issue, is severe,” he said. Five men who brought the case had been designated terror suspects, but had not been charged and were not told what offences they were meant to have committed. The designation meant they had limited spending power and had to have every receipt scrutinised by civil servants. If they breached the tough rules, they could have faced up to seven years in jail. The Treasury said last night it was “disappointed” with the judgment and would appeal. Solicitors for the five men, who were accused of facilitating terrorism but were not allowed to know the specific charges against them, said their treatment had been “devastating and humiliating”. One man blamed his marriage failure on the order. None had convictions for terrorism and all denied any links with terrorism. Solicitors said in a statement: “We have the madness of civil servants checking Tesco receipts; a child having to ask for a receipt every time it does a chore by running to the shops for a pint of milk; and a neighbour possibly committing a criminal offence by lending a lawnmower.” Have Your Say: ‘Terror’ asset-grab absurd and unjust Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Related News
|
Watching the Watchmen: What Obama Can Do About Illegal Surveillance Last post by ZingPao @ 02:20 PM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
In Mexico's Drug War, Bad Cops Are a Mounting Problem Last post by ZingPao @ 02:13 PM Fkn Newz Last post by Unregistered @ 02:05 PM Heisman, BCS on line when Sooners meet Red Raiders Last post by ZingPao @ 02:05 PM Arsenic in my Fluoride? The CDC says Yes! Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:25 PM More Cooking Last post by Unregistered @ 11:16 AM Hey Ashley! Last post by paul w @ 06:02 AM As 'new World Order' Shapes Up, Fear Is That An Anti-christ Spirit Will Control It Last post by Knight of the Word @ 04:21 AM Meditation May Protect Your Brain Last post by ZingPao @ 02:51 AM 911; Inside Job Or Not Last post by ZingPao @ 02:46 AM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More World News  Archive
|
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
By 
Loading ...
I must say that i am pleasently supprised by this ruling as this shows that there is still some commen sense in the U.K. legal system , although it is beccoming a rare comodity these days . We all have too remember that the assets that were frozen were towards SUSPECTS not those who were actualy proven GUILTY and as in the U.K. we do indeed have a system of law that states that we are all assumed INNOCENT until proven GUILTY in a court of law , then by freezing the assets of those only SUSPECTED of a crime is not only assuming that a person is GUILTY before a trial has even taken place but is indeed a breach in my opinion of basic HUMAN RIGHTS !!! .