Entry 642, on 2007-11-15 at 22:14:54 (Rating 4, News)
A major ongoing issue here in New Zealand is a police raid, carried out under anti-terrorism laws, on para-military training camps being run by militant Maori groups (I previously blogged about this almost a month ago under the title "Black and White"). It hasn't been possible to use the anti-terrorism laws to prosecute these people, probably because the laws were so badly worded, but some are being charged under weapons laws instead.
Because of the impending legal action the evidence the police used has been suppressed but a large newspaper recently published it, saying that it served the public interest better to do so. I agree. In fact I think that all information related to police investigations should be publicly available except in extreme circumstances. How can the public knowing the facts be an impediment to justice?
The police evidence is certainly disturbing. Intercepted phone calls and messages mention subjects such as assassinating the next prime minister, how to make and use Molotov cocktails, and how to make napalm. It seems to me that, even if this group might not have been capable of carrying out the threats effectively, there was sufficient reason to raid their camps and stop them even attempting to carry out any of these plans.
Imagine what would have happened if the police didn't stop this threat and a napalm attack actually occurred! People would be saying the police were responsible and demanding resignations everywhere. Instead we have people marching and calling the police and government racist because this potentially violent group were (mainly or wholly) Maori. Well I don't care what color someone brewing up some napalm is, I want them stopped!
There is a further complication in this issue though. The police seem to have been perhaps unnecessarily "thorough" in their raids and subsequent actions relating to the groups. Many people who have turned out to be innocent were put through very disturbing experiences by perhaps over-zealous police actions. Obviously we want effective action to stop violence from erupting, but there has to be some balance too.
The threat of terrorism seems to be an excuse for overly harsh and uncontrolled policing. I don't think there is any need for specific terrorism laws because there are already laws to cover illegal weapons use, incitement to violence, planned and actual murder, and other activities that terrorists might engage in.
So I totally disagree with the marches and claims that the police had no right to raid the camps, but I think we do have to be careful that excessive police force is only used against people where there is really good evidence they are involved with violence or public good will to law enforcement will undoubtedly suffer even when the police are doing a good job in controlling potential trouble.
There are no comments for this entry.
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE