The governments of both United States and United Kingdom continually write new legislation in their individual terror laws to counteract terrorists as they become more sophisticated. Therefore, any survey of terrorism and counter-terror should begin with a short history course on how and why the laws were written. Additionally, it may be useful to compare and contrast the nation’s terror laws to better understand what was originally done to combat terrorism and why the laws may need to be changed or augmented to remain current.
The United States and the United Kingdom are often seen by States and non-state actors alike as two major Western powers often collaborating on matters of national security. However, it should be noted that all peoples, since the dawn of history, have gathered into groups for protection. Eventually, those groups turned into civilizations, and those civilizations into States and eventually Nation-States. Therefore, one goal of any Nation-State is to maintain security for the protection of its people. However, unlike previous wars, since the 1960s, States have increasingly been attacked by non-state actors. Over time, these non-State groups have learned and adjusted their attacks from simple murders and bombs placed in garbage containers near populated areas to using ever more aggressive and sinister techniques, like flying jet commercial aircraft into the sides of buildings. Nation-States often refer to these non-State actors as Terrorists, while Nation-States call their fight against the terrorist, Counter-Terrorism.
After the September 11,2001 attack, the United States created a legal document called, “The Patriot Act.” Its lofty aims were simple, to create a legal document designed to give law enforcement personnel and government agencies the lawful power to investigate and prosecute individuals and groups whose goal is to harm the United States of America, whether it be its people, territories including embassies, or any other American interest. These may include places like American cemeteries located on foreign soils around the world because that is where Americans go. However, the United States was not the first Nation-State to create such a document following a major terrorist attack.
Great Britain forged a similar document in 1974. Known as the 1974 Security Act, the UK wrote the document as retaliation for Irish Republican Army attacks in within the UK. Like the Patriot Act, the earlier 1974 Security Act worked to give UK police and military the lawful right to investigate, prosecute, and if possible, prevent future attacks, by eliminating the people responsible. Unlike the Patriot Act, which was required to pass the strict guidelines established by the United States Constitution as interpreted by the US Supreme Court, the 1974 Security Act had no such constraints because England had no written constitution. Nor did the UK have a Supreme Court to review such a law. Instead, the Parliament, as the supreme legislative body, alone decided on how the law should be written and implemented. However, that being said, it must be noted that while England does not have a written constitution that must be followed, the UK did, and does continue to follow its own set of laws in the form of presidents. By following, and building on what went before to craft future laws, the government was less likely to offend the people it was supposed to protect. This policy also moderated any government responses to any action, including terrorist attacks.
However, since 1974, terrorists have learned much from their attacks. They also learned how the government would respond to those attacks. Furthermore, the resulting attacks then forced the British government to adapt their own responses in kind. Additionally, as terrorist attacks became increasingly sophisticated, the government further lagged behind in its ability to catch terrorists before they could attack. Part of the problem was that as the terrorist become more technologically sophisticated, they also become better educated about how to manipulate the laws to make it easier to plan and execute new acts of terror. Therefore, almost by definition, the police agencies remained at a disadvantage, almost hamstrung by their own inability to lawfully pursue suspects. For that reason, and because of legal challenges to the laws, both the US Patriot Act and the UK 1974 Security Act were forced by courts and by ever changing events to undergo major changes since their inceptions. It also seems likely that these laws must continue to evolve as terrorist become increasingly sophisticated in both their attacks, and in their own subterfuge.
No comments:
Post a Comment