From: Stanton McCandlish <mech@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 12:37:15 PST
To: eff-talk@eff.org
Subject: Britain-Right of Silence (AP) (fwd)
Message-ID: <199311292032.PAA19624@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Abolition of Right of Silence Delights Police, Appalls Critics
By MAUREEN JOHNSON
Associated Press Writer
	   LONDON (AP) _ As the police see it, the government's plan to
abolish the right of silence is a break they deserve.
	   ``We're not asking anyone to confess,'' said Dick Coyles, head
of Britain's 130,000-member Police Federation.
	   ``We're just asking them to tell us, for example, `The reason my
house is full of stolen goods is that this man asked me to look
after them.'
	   ``We want people to put forward their defenses at the time ...
instead of when they've had time to concoct one.''
	   To lawyers and civil rights groups, the bill due to come before
Parliament soon violates a basic tenet of British justice: A
suspect is innocent until proven guilty.
	   The principle dates to the 17th century, when Parliament
abolished the infamous Court of the Star Chamber.
	   The Conservative government's Criminal Justice Bill does not
force anyone to talk. But judges and juries could conclude that a
suspect who refused to answer police questions has something to
hide.
	   In some cases, silence would become part of the prosecution
evidence pointing toward guilt.
	   Civil libertarians are campaigning to save what they see as a
historic right _ the model for the U.S. Constitution's Fifth
Amendment which protects Americans from self-incrimination.
	   The legislation is part of Conservative government efforts to
stem rising crime. It has pitted Prime Minister John Major's
administration against some judges, though others support him.
	   Major has only a 17-seat majority in the 651-member Commons, and
the bill's fate is uncertain. But the issue will mean another
bruising battle for a government already in trouble over squeezes
in welfare spending.
	   Major is going against the advice of a Royal Commission he
appointed two years ago to study the criminal justice system. It
concluded that the right of silence was a valuable safeguard
against miscarriages of justice.
	   Critics argue that removing it will increase the risk of
bullying and oppressive police interrogations and tempt police to
rely too heavily on confessions instead of getting independent
evidence.
	   The government sounds determined, however, and the move is
widely supported by the party's rank and file.
	   To prolonged applause, Home Secretary Michael Howard announced
the policy at the party's annual conference this fall, saying
terrorists were exploiting the right of silence.
	   The change would apply to all suspects _ from careless drivers
to murderers.
	   Opponents say hardened criminals and terror suspects know the
ropes and usually are convicted despite their silence. Those likely
to be harassed into false confessions are confused and frightened
suspects, often of low intelligence, says the civil rights group
Liberty.
	   Roger Ede, secretary of the Law Society, says the average IQ of
suspects at police stations is 82, well below average.
	   ``It is a basic principle of English law that suspects don't
have to prove their innocence by having to explain their actions,''
Ede said.
	   ``Why does the government end up doing the opposite of what they
were advised to do? Because they perceive for political reasons it
is what is required of them.''
	   Liberty began a leaflet campaign to get voters to lobby members
of Parliament.
	   Rising crime _ a 120 percent rise in reported offenses since the
Conservatives won power in 1979 _ is a particular embarrassment for
a party that gave the police big pay raises, built new prisons and
made law and order a centerpiece of its election platforms.
	   The right of silence developed in protest against the oppressive
operation by the Star Chamber Court under the Tudor and early
Stuart kings.
	   In a landmark case in 1637, John Lilburn, accused of printing
seditious books, refused to answer questions. Parliament later
compensated him and the Star Chamber was abolished in 1641.
	   The right of silence became part of English law in 1848.




-- 
Stanton  McCandlish  mech@eff.org  1:109/1103   EFF  Online  Activist & SysOp
O P E N  P L A T F O R M   C R Y P T O P O L I C Y   O N L I N E  R I G H T S
N  E  T  W  O  R  K  I  N  G      V  I  R  T  U  A  L     C  U  L  T  U  R  E
I   N   F  O :  M   E   M   B   E   R   S   H   I   P  @  E  F  F  .  O  R  G