,
11 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
If the same twisted reasoning were applied in other types of cases, would we see child protection laws changed to force victims of abuse back into their abusers' hands?
"No!" you shout? Why not, especially when passion overcomes reason? Is the current law really the problem?
"No!" you shout? Why not, especially when passion overcomes reason? Is the current law really the problem?
#Maldives already has some of the harshest terrorism laws coupled with the most generalised definitions of terror (apart from North Korea, perhaps).
It wasn't the law that helped disappear a journalist, but some who were sworn to uphold it.
Yet we still call to change the law?
It wasn't the law that helped disappear a journalist, but some who were sworn to uphold it.
Yet we still call to change the law?
If those proposals reportedly being considered had been law back then, families alleging police complicity in the disappearance of their loved ones & NGOs calling for State institutions to take specific actions could both be deemed by law to be acts of...you guessed it, terror.
What about a political leader claiming that a sinister network exists within State institutions? Under the new law he could be charged as a terrorist for promoting such a radical view & thereby "endangering the safety of the public".
Seems unthinkable? The facts prove otherwise.
Seems unthinkable? The facts prove otherwise.
Under 2 yrs ago, a former president was arbitrarily detained for 8 months under terrorism laws simply because @PGO_MV said his calls for police to obey an order of the Supreme Court were "an undue influence on the State" = terrorism.
What worse might happen under a harsher law?
What worse might happen under a harsher law?
If a former president was subject to abuse of terrorism laws without anyone in oversight positions brave enough to stop it, how much more danger is there for an ordinary person, especially if controls over abuse are weakened even more?
Far more danger than bears thinking about.
Far more danger than bears thinking about.
Remember the neighbours who video-recorded police torturing a suspect? Under the new law, they could be threatened with immediate arrest & denial of access to a lawyer.
How many of us would be brave enough to say "No! Do your worst" in these circumstances, facing certain arrest?
How many of us would be brave enough to say "No! Do your worst" in these circumstances, facing certain arrest?
The fact that they can later seek redress is not as important as the fact that they were unlawfully arrested or that the evidence of the crime would have been destroyed through abuse of police power.
Without proof, it will be only their word against a police officer's denial.
Without proof, it will be only their word against a police officer's denial.
Indeed, how much later could it be before they can seek justice? Remember, they can be held for 48 hrs without being brought before a judge, they can be stopped from speaking in private with their lawyer, etc.
Would you want this to be you? Of course not, but it really could be.
Would you want this to be you? Of course not, but it really could be.
The true terror is when those in positions of power abuse those powers to commit injustices upon individuals & the oversight organs of the State look the other way.
Weakening oversight & granting more powers to enforcement authorities is not the solution, it IS the problem.
Weakening oversight & granting more powers to enforcement authorities is not the solution, it IS the problem.
