USA Patriot Act - Case Study Example

USA Patriot Act The USA Patriot Act is a legislation that functions to deter and punish terrorist acts both inside and around the Unites States of America. In its preamble, the Act states that it is objected towards enhancing law enforcement investigatory tools and other purposes that are related to this. It is further important to note that the Act full citation is, ‘Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.’ It therefore follows that any acts that fall under the definition of terrorism according to the Act would then call for a criminal charge under this specific Act (Abele, 2005). The situation at hand is one that falls under the USA Patriotic Act considering that its aim is to intercept and obstruct terrorism. Where the federal agents have reason to believe that there is an act of terrorism underway, the Act then allows them to take the appropriate steps to intercept the foreseen looming terrorism action. The government had reason to believe from their appropriate tools that the boy being held had made a bomb threat from his home which they wire-tapped and hence t was only prudent to protect the public from the suspected terrorist whom they were able to intercept his purposed activity before it matured. It therefore makes much sense when the case is interpreted as the USA Patriot case because it involves suspected terrorism inside the U.S.A and interception of the same from trace of a wire-tapped individual (Ball, 2004). Attaining a balance between the protection of the population with the traditional civil rights in a free and open society is a hard nut to crack. However this is not entirely unattainable because some form of balance may still be reached. Putting in mind that the civil right are inherent to everyone in the society and that the public need to be protected, there possibilities of imbalance more so when public interest matters is at hand and therefore the balances likely to shift to the people’s protection. To attain this balance there is need to come up with legal rules that safeguard the rights of individuals and safeguard certain essential rights from being derogated despite the condition or state at hand. This will help draw a balance. In this context the rights to the suspects should be taken into consideration and until proven guilty the individual should be presumed innocent and accorded their civil rights even in the custody as these are still inherent to them and should not be scrapped off unless by law, where this has to be justifiable in and open and democratic society. The evidence based on technological information and in this case showing the crimes origin may not be sufficient enough to warrant a raid to the location. The evidence is however important to help in leading the respective concerned bodies to establishing firmer evidence that a particular individual could have a link to the main people involved in the crime. N the modern society technology could be hacked into and devices used to conceal the exact position of an individual. It therefore follows that a mere wire-tap showing a given location may be misleading and entirely wrong. There is need to focus on much more reliable evidence than the technology that is interfered with by hackers and other computer crimes that will often give wrong information. The U.S.A patriot Act devoid the suspect his civil rights and puts the suspected individual at a point that these rights are no longer inherent to them. The focus being taken by the act is in such a way that the suspect is guilty and hence will have to prove their innocence in the court. This should not be so. The civil rights opine in the spirit of the rules of natural justice that an individual is innocent until proved guilty, which a critical look at the Patriot Act does not exhibit any of this (Ball, 2004). On this account the civil right to privacy has been compromise. It is true to note that the Act allows the federal agents, the police and the other bodies working for the federal government on this the more latitude to search telephone records, emails and other records without the Court’s order. The agents of the government have also been empowered to search individual houses and account records. This is farfetched in violating the privacy rights of such individuals. Where their innocence is proven, such individuals are left with exposed personal life exposed, one that cannot be restituted. The violation of the right to privacy ought to be addressed in the Act as some agents even misuse it for their personal issues. Secondly and finally, it is not proper to detain an individual and disallow them access to their family and legal aid for a long time. The act has been said to detain individuals indefinitely an action that violates the civil rights of the detainee. The detained individual ought to have access to an attorney at the states expense and be arraigned in court as soon as possible from the time of his arrest, preferably in 24 hours’ time. The Act should therefore consider a rectification of this provision that allows their detention indefinitely. The terrorist suspects are humans whose right are inherent and should not be curtailed unless under a legal justification in an open and democratic society, which the USA is. References Abele, R. P. (2005). A user's guide to the USA Patriot Act and beyond. Lanham, Md. [u.a.: Univ. Press of America. Ball, H. (2004). The USA Patriot Act of 2001: Balancing civil liberties and national security: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO. Read More