More Terrorism Act Section 58 "Thought Crimes" ?
There are now 4 students facing charges solely under the "Thought Crime" of Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 Collection of information
The "catch all" Section 58 now seems to be used much more widely than previously..
The details of these latest 4 cases have obviously not yet emerged, but it is very worrying that the only charges against the 4 students are under this Section 58 i.e. there is obviously not enough evidence of any firearms, explosives, terrorist finance, or even of an actual conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism.
That the media reports below, suggest that the alleged terrorism is "abroad", rather than in the UK is also significant . What exactly is the alleged risk to the UK ?
One of the students is apparently a forensic science student . Once the finger and state machinery of suspicion have been pointed at such a person, is there anything in their textbooks, course material or internet related studies which cannot be construed to be "information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" ?
How many of the readers of this blog e.g those with a. technical education or journalists or even policemen, also have the same sort of knowledge. which if they write it down or save it on their computer, could also be construed as being "information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" ?
The BBC reports
Two more charged under terror act Another two teenage students have been charged with terrorist offences.Aitzaz Zafar, 18 and Usman Malik, 19, both from Bradford, have been charged under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act, Scotland Yard said.
They are accused of possessing a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist and will appear before Bow Street Magistrates on Friday.
Irfan Raja, 18, from Ilford, Essex, and 19-year-old Awaab Iqbal are accused of making a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist.Lawyers for the pair indicated both would be pleading not guilty - counsel for Mr Iqbal saying the charges had "absolutely no foundation".
Mr Iqbal was arrested at his home in Bradford last week.
The first-year forensic science student, who studies at Bradford University, had an application for bail refused.
Earlier, Mr Raja had made no application for bail.
Prosecutor Deborah Walsh said the charge against Mr Raja related to information he had allegedly collated and downloaded using a computer.
Comments
During my Police interview I was asked questions for which I now realise I could have been charged under Section 58 had I answered yes. I was hesitant when asked if there was anything that could be construed to cause a public nuisance as I have no idea what the Police would include in that (in particular I do have some articles downloaded following links from Bruce Schneier's Cryptogram that I hope to find the time to read one day), questions about plans were all answered immediately with the obvious 'no'.
I know nothing about the cases of these two students, but being arrested solely on thought crime charges is indeed very scary for all.
Posted by: David Mery | March 11, 2006 12:12 AM
As a first year Archiecture student.. I wrote a comparison essay on The buildings of Parliment and the Idea of The Panopticon (a prision)... For this I had to collect information on both buildings!
Would that be considered under section 58?
Thats such crap.
Posted by: Asif | July 10, 2006 4:50 PM
@ Asif - since this blog post there have been several more people arrested and charged under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act.
It is stupid, and catch-all, and unfair, and it is the law.
There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people who have much more detailed and potentially dangerous information (which may be of some use to some uknown terrorist, anywhere in the world, either now ,or in the future) than that which these people are being arrested, charged and convicted for.
Section 58 provides a "defence" but it it reverses the normal burden of proof - you have to show that your possession of something is not suspicious, rather than the usual method of justice, whereby the prosecution have to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that you were up to something criminal.
In many cases, trying to prove a negative or the absence of something, is impossible.
Posted by: wtwu | July 10, 2006 5:51 PM
Has anybody else out there stopped saying what they really believe in because of the strange looks they are given, i.e., over Israel, 9/11, 7.7 etcetera. Even one's friends are looking at one strangely. Or am I being paranoid!!!!!
Posted by: pam | March 11, 2007 7:10 PM
@ pam - the chilling part of this quotation from George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four, is the self censorship which a surveillance society induces in people, even when they are not being snooped on:
Posted by: wtwu | March 12, 2007 3:39 AM
The real Masters of Terror are the politicians and the senior police officers whom they serve.
Posted by: Theo Delight | September 18, 2007 7:16 AM