Proceeding contribution from Geoffrey Cox (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
Yes, the right hon. Gentleman probably could not afford them. The point about the Attorney-General’s discretion is a very serious one. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal said, the Attorney-General will have to decide when a form of speech is an offence under the clause. Will that depend on the race of the speaker or on his religion? The answer is yes: no impression would be excited if I were to praise Saladin in such circumstances, but it would be if I were an imam. The context would be wholly different. The Attorney-General will have to decide the factors involved, and there is no place in our law for a discretion of such width.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c426
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Civil liberties Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Appeals Detainees Applications Arrests Evidence Incitement Judges National security Prosecutions Police custody Terrorism Remand in custody Cryptography High Court Habeas corpus Encouragement of terrorism Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-09-24 16:00:25 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272716
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272716
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272716