Both U.S Patriot Act and UK's Counter-terrorism Act 2008 are laws that are meant to provide framework for fighting crimes. They contain important legislation pertaining to gathering of information regarding terrorist and how suspects should be arrested and interrogated. The two pieces of legislations gives the enforcement agencies more power to seek information and apprehension of suspected terrorist.
The counter terrorism Act 2008 was enacted in January 2008 and received a royal assent in November 2008. It builds on the earlier counter-terrorism act 2000 and comes with more provision for enforcement agencies to collect vital information. Unlike the preceding act, this act gives the police force more power in counter terrorism effect, which is one of the main advantages of this act. In particular, this legislation provides for removes prohibition of post charge questioning, stricter and loner terrorism sentences, register and monitoring of individuals who have been conflicted of terrorism, power to seize assets of convicted terrorist, police power of over document, use of DNA samples and finger prints (OPSI, 2010). This means that this act gave police the power to question suspected after they have been charged in a bid to extract more information. In particular, this act has given the police power to detain suspects for 42 days without being produced in court. In addition it provides for private questioning of suspected terrorist by the coroners inquest secretary from the internet of the jury for the purpose of national internet. However, this act has a disadvantage in the sense that it gives the police more powers to arrest journalist who are seen taking pictures of the police or who attempts to elicit information about the police. This means it is likely to gag photo journalism since they are likely to be very selective and may refrain from taking pictures in the presence of the police.
US patriot Act has been widely criticized for infringing with individual freedom of information. It has provisions that allow the police force to obtain document, tap telephone conversations, e-mail communication, search medical and financial records, in an effort to solicit any information pertaining to terrorism. It also gives the Treasury power to regulate financial transactions especially those which involve foreign individual and entities. It also broadens the discretion power of the law enforcement and immigration authorities to detain immigrations who are reported of engaging in terrorism activities. There are many advantages of the U.S patriot act. It empowers and streamlines communication between various governments agencies involved in the fight against terrorism. It provides a platform for them to work together in investigating terrorist activities (Wong, 2007). The act also provides for easier ways to investigate and continue surveillance on suspected individuals. This act also provides for increase funding victims of terrorist attack and their families. However it has disadvantages in that it is too thorough. It gives the government sweeping powers to monitor individual habits especially those who are suspected of being terrorists (Fistcher, 2007). Title II of the act also gives the government power to monitor semi-public records like public records
The two acts shares a lot in common but they are different in other aspects. Both are meant to enforce anti terrorism measures and they recognize the importance of gaining timely information to apprehend suspects. However, the counter terrorism act has more stringent provision including giving police power for post-charge question, seizing of terrorist properties, and longer jail sentences compared to the patriot act. Patriotic act does not prohibit taking of police pictures as provide in counter-terrorism act. The revised Patriot Act should bear some of these provisions to make it more effective.
The counter terrorism Act 2008 was enacted in January 2008 and received a royal assent in November 2008. It builds on the earlier counter-terrorism act 2000 and comes with more provision for enforcement agencies to collect vital information. Unlike the preceding act, this act gives the police force more power in counter terrorism effect, which is one of the main advantages of this act. In particular, this legislation provides for removes prohibition of post charge questioning, stricter and loner terrorism sentences, register and monitoring of individuals who have been conflicted of terrorism, power to seize assets of convicted terrorist, police power of over document, use of DNA samples and finger prints (OPSI, 2010). This means that this act gave police the power to question suspected after they have been charged in a bid to extract more information. In particular, this act has given the police power to detain suspects for 42 days without being produced in court. In addition it provides for private questioning of suspected terrorist by the coroners inquest secretary from the internet of the jury for the purpose of national internet. However, this act has a disadvantage in the sense that it gives the police more powers to arrest journalist who are seen taking pictures of the police or who attempts to elicit information about the police. This means it is likely to gag photo journalism since they are likely to be very selective and may refrain from taking pictures in the presence of the police.
US patriot Act has been widely criticized for infringing with individual freedom of information. It has provisions that allow the police force to obtain document, tap telephone conversations, e-mail communication, search medical and financial records, in an effort to solicit any information pertaining to terrorism. It also gives the Treasury power to regulate financial transactions especially those which involve foreign individual and entities. It also broadens the discretion power of the law enforcement and immigration authorities to detain immigrations who are reported of engaging in terrorism activities. There are many advantages of the U.S patriot act. It empowers and streamlines communication between various governments agencies involved in the fight against terrorism. It provides a platform for them to work together in investigating terrorist activities (Wong, 2007). The act also provides for easier ways to investigate and continue surveillance on suspected individuals. This act also provides for increase funding victims of terrorist attack and their families. However it has disadvantages in that it is too thorough. It gives the government sweeping powers to monitor individual habits especially those who are suspected of being terrorists (Fistcher, 2007). Title II of the act also gives the government power to monitor semi-public records like public records
The two acts shares a lot in common but they are different in other aspects. Both are meant to enforce anti terrorism measures and they recognize the importance of gaining timely information to apprehend suspects. However, the counter terrorism act has more stringent provision including giving police power for post-charge question, seizing of terrorist properties, and longer jail sentences compared to the patriot act. Patriotic act does not prohibit taking of police pictures as provide in counter-terrorism act. The revised Patriot Act should bear some of these provisions to make it more effective.
SHARE
