logo

Case Study on Counter-terrorism in UK

   

Added on  2020-01-21

7 Pages2603 Words135 Views
NAME:REGISTRATION NUMBER:COURSE TITLE:

Case study on counter-terrorism in UKThe threat from terrorism justifies a robust response from parliament concerning the counter-terrorism powers it gives to the State. It is justifiable and legitimate to limit individual human rights to protect our democracy and way of life. Analyze the accuracy of this statement in light of the current threat level from terrorism and the context of one or more counter-terrorism powers. Analysis of counter-terrorism threat and powers towards protection of democracy and way of lifeDefinition of issueTerrorism as of date has no definite meaning, but as discussed from various sources, we can conclusivelycome to a point of understanding its meaning rather than its definition. Many sources try to define. State Department defines as, "Politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents". Defense Department defines as, "The unlawful use of violence to instill fear and threat governments or societies. Can often be motivated by religious, political,or other ideological beliefs and committed in the pursuit of goals that are usually political." Also the United Nations Defines Terrorism as "That act aimed to cause serious bodily injury to a civilian, or to anyother person not taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a government oran international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.” All these definitions try to circulatearound a point that seeks to protect the laws governing the nation and its innocent citizens in that the general concerns consists of violence, psychologically inducing fear to the nation and its citizens, achieving political goals, deliberate aiming of unarmed civilians, and illegitimacy. Some human rights arealso viewed as contributing factor to these terrorist attacks. Therefore, there is the need for creating bounds for every single human right not to go to protect the democracy and peoples’ way of life. Humanrights are universal, that is, applies to all people for being human, indivisible where no one is allowed to be in a position of choice on which rights he or she is to respect or honour. Also, cannot be taken away just because someone is hated for seeking to practice their rights that are to say human rights are inalienable but can only be limited in no doubt well-defined conditions where some rights like torture prohibition and slavery will never in a way become limited. However, some human rights have recently left the state in controversy on its limitation to gap the issue of the terror attack on the States’ soil.

The work of a government is to create a conducive ground to its civilians and protecting their democracies. However, recent studies have shown that there is a danger that Muslims in Britain may become the new suspect community. The operatives and policymakers are grappling with the aged dilemma: it is an indisputable fact that the many of those assumed of terrorist activities are Muslim, andthat counter-terrorism measures are likely to target Muslims. However, those measures will be counter-productive if they make ordinary British Muslims, who are of course just as affected by the terrorist threat as anyone else, feel they are constantly under suspicion. There has been a strong sense from those participating that Muslims and non-Muslims were living parallel lives, with Muslims much more aware of the impact of counter-terrorism measures than their non-Muslim members. Some Muslim participants had experienced specific measures first hand, while others were simply concerned that suchpolicies were contributing towards a wider hostility towards Muslims. However, counter-terrorism legislative measures and policies have been introduced in the UK in recent years in response to a perceived heightened risk of terrorist attack.The freedom of expression and religion is one of the human rights. Following the recent events that tookplace in France and Belgium in January 2015, there was a tremendous impact across the European Union (EU) and beyond. Reactions by the EU Member States to these events in the short-, medium- andlong term has major implications for the safeguard of the fundamental rights of all those who live in the EU. In the immediate consequences of the events in Paris, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) collected responses across Europe; these were through focusing on Jewish and Muslim community organizations, political leaders, civil society and the media. Due to rapidly changing situations, this review can be regarded as a snapshot. The attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices on 7 January 2015 that left 12 people dead framed the initial debate on the necessity of protecting the right to freedom of expression. However, the subsequent murder of four Jewish people in a kosher supermarket and the deadly shooting of a police officer in Paris, as well as the suspected attack on police in Belgium added other dimensions to political, media and civilian responses across the EU. All of these events nonetheless had one aspect in common, which led to a reframing of the interpretation of the issues at stake: the perpetrators were young, Muslim, EU citizens with an immigrant background, who have been radicalized at home. The main focus of attention therefore shifted from issues of freedom of expression to preventing violent radicalization and countering terrorism, as demonstrated by the raft of measures proposed in France on 21 January, with other EU Member States following suit. It is in this context that adiscussion of fundamental rights, which are among the EU’s founding values, becomes particularly

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Combatting Terrorism: Effective State Responses and Lessons from Australia and Singapore
|9
|1761
|399

Effects of Counterterrorism on Civilians
|4
|684
|317

Comparative Analysis of Crime Against Humanity
|21
|5372
|120

Government And Intelligence Agencies Report
|11
|2894
|21

The Impact of Terrorism on Aviation Security: A Look at 9/11 and its Aftermath
|7
|2103
|287

Impact of Terrorism on Society: Exploring Influencing Factors through Criminology Theories
|5
|1405
|67