CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Criminal justice

Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice

Introduction

Following September 11, Western governments around the world implemented antiterrorism legislation as a means of enhancing the capacity of law enforcement to investigate and respond to acts of terrorism. Civil libertarians in each of the countries where such legislation passed have raised claims of the dangerous “slippery slope” of government intrusion into the lives of citizens now being justified in the name of the war on terror.

From the perspective of law enforcement in the United States, little embodies public fears of the erosion of civil rights and liberties more than the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act on October 26, 2001 (Kenney, Grant, 2001). The Act passed with nearly unanimous bipartisan support in the days following the terrorist attacks and sought to enhance law enforcement's ability to investigate terrorist activity by allowing surveillance against the full range of terrorist-related crimes, from financing to the use of weapons of mass destruction. Other provisions allowed for the use of “roving wiretaps” and an ability to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist activity occurred rather than having to obtain multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions. The Act also increased penalties for the harboring of terrorists and/or involvement in terrorist activities both within the United States and abroad (Grant, Terry, 2004).

Discussion

Similarly, the United Kingdom presented its own anti-terror legislation on November 12, 2001, in the form of the Antiterrorism, Crime, and Security Act. Like the USA PATRIOT Act, the UK version was broad in scope, providing additional powers for the police, measures to facilitate interagency information sharing, and airport security. Receiving the most attention within its provisions, the Act also permits the indefinite detention without formal charges of foreign nationals suspected of involvement with al-Qaeda or associated terrorist networks (Davies, Murphy, 2004). The UK Act also makes possible the exchange of information between public organizations, tax collection departments, and intelligence services related to terrorist investigations.

The Government of Canada passed Bill C-36, the Anti-Terrorism Act, as its own means of combating domestic and international terrorism. As with the Patriot Act, Bill C-36 makes it easier to use electronic surveillance against terrorist groups, including eliminating the need to prove that such surveillance is a last resort. The former period of wiretap authorization of 60 days was extended to up to a year. A “preventive arrest” power was created that allows officers to arrest and bring a suspect before a judge who can impose supervision conditions in cases where there are “reasonable grounds” to suspect involvement in terrorist activity.

Although in many cases, the elements of the USA PATRIOT Act (and similar proposals around the world) simply enhanced existing law enforcement capacities, a combination of misinformation and media attention has led many to worry about the potential “slippery slope” of the war on terror (Kenney, Grant, 2001). Particularly within some communities, such as the Muslim and Arab American communities, local jurisdictions have had to work aggressively to restore and/or maintain the support and trust of the residents they ...