Proceeding contribution from Rob Marris (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
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, who is being extremely generous in giving way. It is clear from previous amendments, particularly amendments Nos. 12 and 13, and from what he has said today that going beyond 14 days is not a point of principle for him and that he would contemplate it. However, does he agree that 28 days, which he says is perhaps at the edge of what might be allowed under European conventions, might be a suitable compromise and much better than his proposed new subsection (7) in amendment No. 17, which represents changing the principle as opposed to the number of days involved, whether 14, 28 or 90—that is, questioning after charge? I would find that much more undesirable, and I thought he would as well.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c902
- 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 15:59:09 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273587
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273587
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273587