Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) 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
I agree. On academic treatises, it is quite common, particularly in philosophy departments, to ask university undergraduates to produce essays on the question of whether violence is ever justified. I seem to remember writing one myself. It is not difficult to put together a coherent academic argument, based on recent examples, that good might have come from the use of violence. Such writing would be caught by the operation of the Bill. An academic treatise might reach the conclusion that political violence, including acts of terrorism, was justified in some circumstances. Irrespective of whether the context was a foul regime, or of whether in practice the violence involved attacking the security forces while respecting civilians, such a treatise would be caught by the Bill as it stands—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c843
- 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 15:58:54 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273439
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273439
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273439