No, not for the moment. I have to make a little progress. I shall give way shortly.
I have one other point that relates directly to the constituent of the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field). What does he think that putting three innocent people in prison, in effect, for a month does to community relations and to intelligence? Does it not reinforce the recruiting sergeant for terrorism argument? I shall come back to that point, but how does he think that such action affects the risk to the public at large? The effect would not be what he tries to claim.
What if there were someone, as referred to by the Home Secretary, whom the police felt was guilty, but in circumstances where all the evidence was not available? We have heard in the past few days from the Director of Public Prosecutions. He said that in a terrorist case it is not necessary to have a 50 per cent. probability of conviction before charge—a very important issue. He said that in such cases the criterion is reasonable suspicion. That is the criterion for charging, so what is the criterion for holding beyond 28 days? Presumably it must be less than reasonable suspicion. So what is it? Is it unreasonable suspicion? It simply does not stand up. Reasonable suspicion is a very low criterion, but on that basis we still get 92 per cent. conviction rates.
Counter-Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Davis
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 April 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Counter-Terrorism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
474 c667 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:49:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_460127
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_460127
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_460127