The incidents on September 11. 2001. wherein the duplicate towers of the World Trade Center were attacked at the same time with the Pentagon. has spawned great fright of terrorists activities. This incident paved the manner to the enacting of the US Patriot Act of 2001 merely a little more than a month after the incident. Now. the US Patriot Act is under onslaught because its commissariats allow for maltreatment of constabulary powers therefore go againsting basic human rights.
The Patriot Act was enacted to heighten the authorization of the Federal Bureau of Investigation so that terrorist onslaughts like the 9/11 incident could be prevented. The Act became so controversial because it oversteps the bounds of legal judicial proceedings and violates certain human rights. The Act resulted in rigorous in-migration regulations and allowed for the detention of non-citizens without a proper hearing every bit good as behaving immigrants even in the absence of grounds that they have committed a offense.
Law enforcement can besides “tap telephones. electronic mail messages. personal computing machine difficult thrusts ( including rolling wiretaps ) without a legal likely cause. and bespeak private and personal concern and bank records without a tribunal hearing” ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 289 ) The Act besides allows the justness section to look into a individual who is non suspected of a offense and/or is non the mark of a terrorist probe. in secret conduct “sneak-and-peek” hunts without a warrant. withhold names and other information about persons arrested and detained. keep closed hearings. proctor gaol conversations between lawyers and clients.
The Act besides instituted a new significance for the term “domestic terrorism” and it besides gave the authorities the power to label an organisation a terrorist organisation while the President is given the power to label persons as “enemy combatants” ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 289 ) . The Patriot Act has become a really controversial jurisprudence chiefly because of these commissariats that allow for nonlegal steps. The media highlighted on legion instances of human rights being stepped on because of the power given by the Patriot Act to jurisprudence hatchet mans.
The lawyers of the detained people. who are largely Muslims or Arab that are non U. S. citizens. said that their clients are non knowing of what charges are being pressed against them. They were besides denied communicating with their attorneies and they were put in detainment even as there is no grounds associating them to terrorist activities. Additionally. they were frequently mistreated and physically abused while detained. The attorneies besides indicated that the Justice Department the illicitly detained people and due procedure was violated as proceedings were kept off from public examination.
Basic rights were besides trampled as the detainees were relieved of their right to liberate address while the general populace was denied of their right to information. Even as the Justice Department confirmed these charges in 2003. no apologies were heard about the authoritiess malicious ways of protecting the American populace from terrorists ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 289-290 ) . Allowing nonlegal powers to jurisprudence enforcement in the battle against terrorist act did non work as it has become a channel for maltreatment.
For those foreign people who were subjected to illegal detainment and human rights misdemeanors. these Acts of the Apostless would be equated to terrorist activities. The Justice Department justified their actions stating that “these expanded powers are necessary because the menace presented by terrorists who carried out the September 11 onslaughts required a different sort of jurisprudence enforcement attack. ” The Department said this is concentrating attending on bar instead than on probe and prosecution after a terrorist onslaught ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 289 ) .
Another facet that makes the Patriot Act a complete failure is because legislators did non O.K. it because of virtue. It passed the upper house and the lower house which immense ballots fundamentally because of the events of September 11. including the splenic fever incidents. since it was still fresh in the heads of the people every bit good as the legislators. The jurisprudence passed mostly because of what they call “emotional voting” . It was even referred to as “the worst act of all time passed” and could likely be the largest misdemeanor of civil autonomies in the history of the U. S.
Majority of the legislators that voted for the measure did non even read it as the ballots have already been cast even before the measure could be printed out ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 290 ) . Having seen the negative deductions that the jurisprudence has brought. legion communities have condemned the jurisprudence. As of July 2004. 133 communities from 25 provinces have passed declarations that condemn the Patriot Act. The declarations indicate that the Act is unconstitutional and does non do the state any more secure from terrorist onslaughts ( Ferrel. 2004. p. 290 ) .
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales is one of those functionaries who have expressed a strong disapprobation of the jurisprudence. He proposes “technical modifications” to it ( Eggen. 2005 ) . Even as the Patriot Act is a controversial jurisprudence and has been associated with a batch of deceitful instances. the American populace by and large still believes that the U. S. is weaving the right way. When asked if they think that the Bush Administration was right or incorrect when they decided to make wiretaps without tribunal orders. 50 % per centum said it is right while 46 % said it was incorrect ; 4 % had no sentiment.
However. 50 per centum believe that the Act should hold a few minor alterations as merely 24 per centum believe it should hold major alterations ( USA Today. 2006 ) . Human rights should be upheld. The menace of terrorists is non ground adequate to go against the rights of single people since Torahs and processs are already in topographic point to battle terrorist act. Fall backing to extralegal steps is the work of terrorists and non civil retainers. The Patriot Act is non a good jurisprudence sing that it is unconstitutional and it was hurriedly passed.