Legal Process and Challenging Detention
There were two justifications for an order to intern: "acts prejudicial to the public safety" and "hostile origin or associations".
A detainee could challenge their detention by way of an appeal to an Advisory Committee headed by Norman Birkett. The committee would be presented with a statement of the reasons why detention had been proposed, drawn up by MI5, which the detainee was not permitted to see. The Committee could recommend continued detention, release under condition, or unconditional release. The Committee's recommendations went to the Home Secretary, who was not bound to accept them; MI5 often lobbied him not to accept a recommendation to release.
Some detainees attempted to take further action through the courts. Challenges were brought on the basis of habeas corpus, but refused on the ground that the Home Secretary had taken his decision to intern on the basis of reports which must be kept secret; the Court satisfied itself that he had reasonable cause to sign a detention order.
The most significant case was Liversidge v. Anderson, brought by Robert W. Liversidge who was a successful Jewish businessman and therefore a highly atypical 18B detainee. He brought a civil action for damages for false imprisonment but did not apply for habeas corpus. The ultimate ruling in his case has since been adjudged to have been wrongly decided. It was that where it is required in law that a Minister "has reasonable cause to believe" something before acting, the Court can only inquire into whether he really did believe it, and not whether the things causing this belief were true. Lord Atkin wrote a celebrated dissent from this judgment.
Archibald Maule Ramsay, as the only MP detained, had the matter referred to the House of Commons Committee on Privileges for a ruling as to whether the detention of an MP was a breach of the Privilege of Parliament. It decided that it was not.
Read more about this topic: Defence Regulation 18B
Famous quotes containing the words legal, process, challenging and/or detention:
“In the course of the actual attainment of selfish ends—an attainment conditioned in this way by universality—there is formed a system of complete interdependence, wherein the livelihood, happiness, and legal status of one man is interwoven with the livelihood, happiness, and rights of all. On this system, individual happiness, etc. depend, and only in this connected system are they actualized and secured.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
“A man had better starve at once than lose his innocence in the process of getting his bread.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“Good marriages are built on respectful disagreement and back-and-forth cooperation. We learn to cue each other, fill in for each other, forgive each other’s fumbles, celebrate small victories. We revel in the realization that we’re working on something bigger than both of us, and that parenthood is not only incredibly challenging but also incredibly enriching.”
—Susan Lapinski (20th century)
“I would like you to understand completely, also emotionally, that I’m a political detainee and will be a political prisoner, that I have nothing now or in the future to be ashamed of in this situation. That, at bottom, I myself have in a certain sense asked for this detention and this sentence, because I’ve always refused to change my opinion, for which I would be willing to give my life and not just remain in prison. That therefore I can only be tranquil and content with myself.”
—Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937)