Letters
Habeas Corpus was important
Sir - I could not help but comment on the editorial in the Witney Gazette last week, in its comment upon Gerry Stonhill's battle over smoking laws and the massive fine imposed upon him for allowing smoking in his pub.
What struck me was the editorial's comparison between the importance of allowing smoking (in pubs) against the importance of Habeas Corpus. You rightly implied that Habeas Corpus was essential to the British way of life.
The comment reads: To some people, he is now seen as something of a hero, taking on an unjust piece of legislation by defending the right to smoke in a public place, as if it were as essential to the British way of life as Habeas Corpus.
This part of the editorial is most misleading, and I think it important enough to correct any misunderstanding the public may now have about the position of Habeas Corpus in the body of law of this country.
Habeas Corpus was important, and protected the public from arbitrary arrest. But Habeas Corpus has been effectively abolished following the Government's several anti-terrorist legislation acts.
Habeas Corpus meant that a suspect could not be held or detained for more than 24 to 48 hours (the latter if arrested on a Saturday afternoon) without:
* appearing in court (before the magistrates) in a PUBLIC hearing, at which the charge is formulated against him, and
* he being able to demand at that hearing that the police produce the evidence they have already gathered against him.
You must be aware that the Government has periodically pressed Parliament to pass laws for detention without charge/trial to be as much as 90 days. Parliament had opposed this, but conceded 28 days - the present limit - but Tony Blair and Gordon Brown had/have on several occasions demanded 90 days.
Mr Brown is currently asking for the 28 day limit to be increased to 42 days (why this oddball figure, we do not know).
You should know that the ultimate goal is six months to bring us into line with the EU's Corpus Juris, and practices on the continent. The editorial is correct in seeing Habeas Corpus as (was) important for the British way of life, but unfortunately, wrong in implying it's still there. It would be most unfortunate if the public go around thinking that our ancient liberties are secure, when they no longer are.
David Barnby, New Yatt Road , Witney
2:34pm Tuesday 29th April 2008
Print 
Email this 
Comment
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
