UK Toughens Anti-Terror Efforts Through New Law

The Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill has received Royal Assent from the Queen, now making it an Act. It would toughen powers to seize passports at the border from anybody suspected of travelling to Syria or Iraq for extremist activity.

Home Secretary Theresa May considers it an important legislation.

"This important legislation will disrupt the ability of people to travel abroad to fight and then return, enhance our ability to monitor and control the actions of those who pose a threat, and combat the underlying ideology that feeds, supports and sanctions terrorism," she said.

"The shocking attacks in Paris last month, in which 17 people lost their lives, and the many plots that the police and security and intelligence agencies continually work to disrupt, are clear evidence of the threat we face from terrorism. 



"We have a fundamental duty as a government to ensure that the people who work to keep us safe have the powers they need to do so.”

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures will allow Home Security to relocate suspected terrorists and require them to attend meetings with probation staff as part of their case management.

The new act also introduces new temporary exclusion orders to stop anybody coming from Iraq or Syria from returning to the United Kingdom. It would also allow law enforcement agencies to identify devices responsible for sending communication on the internet or accessing an Internet communications service.

Why the UK-ECHR Issue is Just There to Spite UKIP

It is obvious that the Conservatives have a particular disliking for UKIP because of its very radical ideas. The government is clearly planning to dull the UKIP’s edges by doing many of the things it intends to do for the public once it gains seating.

One of them is the issue of scrapping the human rights provisions for criminals and terrorists in the United Kingdom.

The UK had longed to deport terrorists and war criminals from the country, but previous cases of the European Centre for Human Rights (ECHR) is limiting the autonomous decisions of the UK High Court. The UKIP had promised the UK that these human rights provisions will not be enforced by the ECHR by completely disconnecting the ECHR’s previous rulings with the UK’s legal decisions.

Conservative party member and Justice Secretary Chris Grayling had put forward a proposal, seen by ex-Attorney General Dominic Grieve as “basically erroneous,” will ensure the ECHR’s previous rulings and human rights provisions for criminals will be treated as advice rather than a staple for the rulings.

However, I think that if the Conservatives really wanted what the people wanted from the UKIP, they would just severe the ties completely and do away with being in Europe. It was as if Grayling just wanted to spite the UKIP for some reason.

Well, the Conservatives are lagging behind Labour and the Liberal Democrats. However, if they want to smear images, they better do better than that.

Beyond Being Offensive: The Social Media Rights Guide

In the UK, the government have arrested several individuals who had posted statements that “go beyond the threshold of expression” against individuals or beliefs. While many cried foul against the arrests, prosecutors and the government explain that everyone has a right to express themselves online and be obscene with their expressions, but there is a boundary line as indicated by the following parameters.

1.    Distinction

Given the obscene and uncensored communications found online in forums, discussion boards and social media, the UK’s guidelines of distinction must show that the statement targets the harassment of an individual, is a credible threat of violence,  breaches court orders regarding confidential statements in all formats of Internet media.

2.    Stalking and Harassment

Any evidence or statements that imply stalking on part of a potential suspect, including hacking and manipulation of personal social media accounts is a social media and Internet criminal offense. Harassment in the form of rallying communities against certain individuals, groups, organisations or companies are also considered an offense.

3.    Freedom of Expression and Criminal Law

Offensive posts, whether they are shocking, rude, satirical, iconoclastic, an unpopular discussion of delicate topics, are subject to public scrutiny and if the public deems it to be an offensive case, the government could arrest the individual, group, organisation or company who posted such media. However, if such entities showed remorse upon posting the statement, criminal charges from the authorities are less likely.

Copyright Myths in the United Kingdom

As innovators, inventors and musicians wish to copyright their work to prevent others from stealing it, they cannot protect its every aspect completely. Here are some myths existing in the United Kingdom’s copyright service.

1.     Ideas

A copyright only applies to a recorded work, but not to an idea. Inventions usually have patents. The actual recorded work, which includes documents, music, music sheets, artwork and other data, if copied by a competitor, the copyright services consider as a copyright infringement. There is no way you could prevent others from developing on the similar idea you have.

2.     Names and Titles

Copyrights do not apply to names and titles that are very common or easily duplicated. Two works might have the same title as long as none of them copied or adapted from each other. There is still protection on the name if it is a trademark or if it could mislead or confuse the public. The protection is solely reliant on the connotation of the name in society.

3.     Poor Man’s Copyright

The poor man’s copyright, which is posting a copy of your work to yourself, actually will not protect your work because it will be very easy to fake the documentations by changing the date of your materials. Even if you send your work to yourself for a record in the postal service, the materials can be swapped inside the packages, or unless proven otherwise.

What to Do When a Child is at Risk of Partner Abuse

A child is vulnerable to abuse to anything, including physical, verbal or sexual abuse from the parent’s partner him or herself. You could get legal aid to help with such issues that can remove a father’s parental responsibility through the help of a legal solicitor. Child abuse could be proven in one of the following types of convictions.

1.     Criminal Conviction

If your partner has an already existing criminal conviction offence, it will count as effective evidence for legal aid.  Check to see if your ex-partner was given a police caution for child abuse, the court where the partner was sentenced and completing a criminal conviction template letter from both the Magistrate or the Crown court.

2.     Police Caution

A police caution for child abuse against your ex-partner in the last two years also counts as substantial evidence for legal aid. You will only need a written record of your caution. Complete a police caution template letter and have it sent to the Police Force’s Data Protection Officer for processing.

3.     Social Services

 If your child has a child protection plan from social services in the last two years that protects him or her from your ex-partner, you could use this as evidence. The social service’s assessment could serve as a good evidence for your legal aid application. Have a copy of the assessment plan, make sure that the person evaluated is your child  and the abuser as your ex-partner. Find a copy of a social services template letter and write to your local social services department.