European Constiutional Assertion Bill We have a growing trend in Europe of an abdication of constitutional law. As the gravest threat to civil liberty in Europe, we have for the first time in the democratic age, a case in Europe where habeas corpus could be suspended. That a member of the European Union is involved in the private prosecution of individuals outside of the legal framework and its affect on the constitutional principle of the EU. I believe the European tradition is able to provide a constitutional guard based on its own founding principles to support an open, democratic justice system and ensure national security does not supersede our constitutional principles. With increasing pressure to maintain a vision of public services it is vital we obtain structures of compliance for the demands we face as a modern democracy of the future. Britain which pioneered the global concept of democracy with the Magna Carter, a beacon of light for the world to follow, has an important place in deciding how these challenges of democracy are managed. We should ask ourselves is our democratic vision in a time of austerity compatible with the accountability and compliance demands of a modern working democracy of 21st century Europe? I believe our legislators supported with the legal framework as guardians of our constitution, must exercise their legal duty and arbitrate the risk factors inherent in any classification of national security. Levels of threat that could diminish the rights and freedoms of European citizens must be issued by court order so that it is not open to abuse. The European Justice Bill must incorporate a wider written constitution to safeguard civil liberties when questions of national security arise. We are aware of intelligence failings in foreign policy decisions, the risks exist for domestic policy where intelligence and security services have a considerable say over how we govern our lives based on the security risks they independently determine for us. Why is this process not subject to scrutiny when our constitutional principles are at risk? It has been noted that since 9/11 the wholesale destruction of civil liberties as has been the case in counter-terrorism legislation amount to a state of collective punishment. Judicial interference in any form is unacceptable, particularly if that interference comes supposedly in defence of humanitarian values. Will we reaffirm the values our nation was founded on or veer towards an oppressive world where we attempt to regulate the vitality of society because we are unable to accommodate unity of purpose. Those who jeopardise, sacrifice or abandon due process, must be held accountable for the terrorism they inspire. The torture and indefinite detention of civilians has been condemned repeatedly following 9/11, however we find repeated attempts by the UK Security Services to encroach on civil liberties despite the fundamental value of these liberties in protecting the British way of life. Such action on its own accord could be considered a threat to national security. We believe the United Kingdom would do itself better justice if it stood by the principles that made it a great nation. As our justice system stands under threat, so do the freedoms of expression, democratic consent and the health of our society. We have a choice before us, we can look to the past or look to the future to articulate the choice that is before the European Union. If we look to the past we must follow those institutions accused of harbouring delusions of grandeur and risk a bleeding ulcer in a second level, second tier power over extending itself in the world as a first level power. Those who will endeavor to look to the future will honour the European vision of democratic consent. To progress the national interest to preserve the delicate equilibrium of the world around us and adjust towards an equitable world with a balance of powers, production, competitive advantage and technology. We must find our place in the world as equal, equitable partners and fulfill the dream of European Justice. We know the areas we have neglected, the prosecution of an illegal war in Iraq and Syria and the revealing of individual war crimes carried out within that war; the targeting and inhumane treatment of individuals throughout the world and the collusion of governments in that targeting; the torture and rendition of European citizens. European citizens who have complained of being tortured are unable to prosecute those involved in their torture because of claims of national security, we see the executive branch of government use national security to protect their own corruption and fraud against the public interest. Authorising the use of ‘necessity defence’ to get away with lawless practice. There have been several instances of administrative detention without trial. Can we allow European citizens to be excluded from democratic consent and intimidated by their own national security? It is disconcerting to see Europe sleep-walking into approving laws that suspend due process. Sadly, when you get this amplified use of surveillance, plus claims of personal data malpractice combined with unprecedented access to the public space, we have circumstances that will inevitably suspend due process. History has shown that democracy is unable to support itself with secretive mechanisms that can and have been known to abuse power and betray public trust. There are grave concerns the intelligence and security services could become above accountability, a state within a state, because intelligence and security services are judged to handle sensitive information. Is this an issue of organizational culture and management, should there be complacency to the fact that our intelligence and security services are implicated in torture. There are grave concerns for the way European intelligence and security services are governed and the reliability of their intelligence information in crucial foreign policy decisions in the interest of public safety we must ensure intelligence and security approval committees fulfill their responsibility under the direction and public scrutiny of parliament as a valued/integrated committee of parliament. Urgent improvements to accountability are required to avoid immediate public safety risks. Can we allow ourselves to diminish accountability of intelligence and security on the basis of ambiguous threat to national security? I ask the EU citizens we make a stand for justice and help protect those who shine a light on the crimes on justice and equality. The national interest should be governed by good management, procedure and oversight. The promise of a Justice and Safety Bill is within your grasp. Justice, the pride and envy of every nation, is the very embodiment of national integrity. We must protect our national heritage and save our human rights legacy/achievements.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:46:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015