Download file to see previous pages...
Though the previous Bush administration had claimed that around 50% of the accused were convicted in terrorism cases, an analysis had brought to light that the convictions were only of a much smaller number and the average length of the sentence was around 11 months(Eggen.&Tate.2005). Another important incident that has been the point of debate is a ticking bomb case which would demand unconstrained powers of interrogation. Here the danger might be prevented with brutal interrogation methods. It has been clearly stated that the 5th, 8th and 14th amendments of the constitution provides for all types of torture which is “cruel, inhuman and degrading”. But the administrators explicitly argued that in a war against terrorism, the treaty is invalid, since the troops were of no country but aliens, against whom war may be waged indefinitely. The argument was that the treaty was valid for only within the United States.
The Patriot Act was the immediate result of the act of terrorism committed on the United States. At first it was overstated and then treated as if it was very radical and dangerous by the civil liberties community. On the other hand the claim made by the president under the war powers was more substantial than the Patriot Act. These powers were claimed by a General resolution passed by the Congress soon after September 11th. The new powers were asserted to detain American citizens, as well as others, and supported the coercive interrogation of hundreds abroad. But such interrogation would be against the very standards on which the foundation of the nation is built. But what is much more binding is that by ratifying international treaties the United States has limited itself from not only using torture, but also “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”.
The new administration under President Obama has been determined to bring back some good will. It has completely taken away the rights of detention authority of the
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Section 1 of the Prevention of terrorism Act of 2005 defines terrorism as the threat of action, whereby the actions involves the use of violence against other people, serious property damage or creates a serious risk of healthy and safety of the public. The UK terrorism intelligence gathering uses sophisticated methods that are geared at breaking down the terrorist network before they commit the attacks.
If the citizen was a member of a foreign terrorist group, in a foreign country, or working for a foreign government, they could be considered an unlawful enemy combatant. An example is Jose Padilla, a US citizen charged in Chicago with aiding terrorists in the construction of a 'dirty bomb'.
The justicability of the UK courts however has always been compromised to some extent by judicial deference to parliamentary sovereignty. This deference has never been more significant than it has in recent years with respect to
Are you going to send agents to attend Mosques? Are you going to develop informants among those already living in that population? Are you bounded by any ethical considerations other than the need to prevent needless deaths through terrorism?
Based on the
The author states that California is also the economic hub of America and also houses the biggest number of important buildings, international corporations and film industry. After 9/11, US Patriotic Act was amended and renamed ‘USA Patriot and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act’. There were introduced surveillance and detention of people.
n as the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) on the 18th of September 2001, the President had the authority to attack any persons, organizations or nations that assisted the terrorists in executing their dastardly act as this would prevent any future occurrence of
illa be detained in military custody where he remained for the next two years while his attorney sought to challenge his detention via a Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Subjiciendum (Writ).
“A writ [is] directed to the person detaining another, and commanding him to produce the body
A special, top secret court, termed as the FISA was crafted to hear appeals for such justifications. Safeguards were placed in a position to make certain that investigators following criminal issues did not
In reference with today’s terrorism, there is a great difference as many of these nations battle to attain political power. However, there is a great difference in the tactics used by militants during those early days. This is following the growth and advancement in
1 Pages(250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Counter-Terrorism: Constitutional and Legislative Issues for FREE!