Proceeding contribution from John Denham (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
Is not the problem that, in the example given by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Medway (Mr. Marshall-Andrews), if one deleted the words ““destruction of power lines””—or whatever—and inserted the words ““killing of civilians”” and ““oppressive regime””, the Government certainly intend to catch that under clause 1? The only thing that would prevent someone from being prosecuted for using such language in the South African context, or in the context of suicide bombers, would be the decision of the Attorney-General. In effect, a political judgment would be made about whether someone was to be prosecuted? Is there a way round that?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c841
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal investigation Detainees Evidence Incitement Judges Police Powers Prosecutions Public interest Police custody Negligence Terrorism Training Remand in custody 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 15:58:53 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273428
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273428
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273428