Anti-Terrorism bill 2000. A necessary evil Dissertation

Anti-Terrorism bill 2000. A necessary evil - discourse Examplerights activists who claim that the implementation of threat laws have failed to pr level(p)t extremism, instead have led to the make-up of theoretical and political movements, that claim these terror laws unfairly target the Islamic community. 1 There be also claims that the legislations have isolated the UK Islamic community from the general civic community, giving rise to an automatic teller of ager, mistrust, and hatred. The British coalition administration has recently underlined the failure of multiculturalism and brought forth the necessities of creating an active muscular liberalism which would identify the report causes of extremist ideologies.2 (PMs speech at Munich Security Conference, 2011). Furthermore, in the 2010 review of terror related legislations and strategies, UK government proposed exploration of wider strategies for countering terrorism acts, known as CONTEST. The main idea underlining CONTEST is to alleviate the contingencies that may countermand within UK from terrorism at a global level. This strategy is based on four main ideas, which are Prevention of terror acts Pursue, that aims at blocking all kinds of terrorist attacks Protection, to fortify the existing counter-terrorism systems against future terrorist attacks and prep for terrorist attacks by assuaging its effect on the people (HM Government, Prevent Strategy, 2011). The critics feel that the miscellaneous counter-terrorism strategies and policies implemented in UK, has created a lack of trust between the Muslims, and the UK law enforcement agencies. 1.1 Background invoice The history of terror and counter-terrorism strategies to repress the terror acts were started as early as 1790s, when the French revolution and the associated acts of violence and radicalism created a panic in... The paper tells that the history of terror and counter-terrorism strategies to repress the terror acts were started as early as 1790s, when the French revolution and the associated acts of violence and radicalism created a panic in UK that such acts of subversion would take place in Britain, against the blueprintr classes. This prompted the adoption of mixed stringent measures by British Parliament and executive, against sedition, and a large number of the sanctioned accomplished liberties, won over through many years of strong activism, were removed due to pressure from various arenas. Thus, it was the first instance in UK where were many of the sanctioned civil liberties were cut short to abort acts of terror. However, UK employ its special powers related to emergencies, primarily in the various colonial (occupied) territories, where during revolts against imposed British rule by the native residents, the ruling UK authorities often suspended all common legislative provisions and the rule of emergency declared. Such emergencies would include detention in prisons without any trial, suspension of habe as corpus, and formation of military tribunals, and the correct standards of the British common law were sidestepped during these times. Emergency powers were also widely in vogue during the two heavy(p) Wars, where the executive of the erstwhile UK government were given widespread powers to detain people involved or even suspected of being involved in activities related to helping the enemy, and various measures were taken to protect discipline security.