"..this would occur even if their comments fell within the law"

As part of a new 'counter terrorism' drive a senior whitehall official is quoted as saying "..this would occur even if their comments fell within the law" whilst being interviewed about the new 'Contest 2' strategy which aims to 'isolate and publicly reject' those that urge separation. The source is also quoted as saying Britain "needs to identify and back shared values" and "...We now believe that we should challenge people who are against democracy and state institutions".

On the face of it this all sounds like a very reasonable policy to identify leaders seeking to stir up potential extremists and put a stop to their provokative speeches.

However, it worries me to hear talk about silencing people who speak within the law. Surely, if you have not broken any law then the authorities have no right to interfere with you, if the law is not suitable then that is a matter for parliament to debate and correct if necessary, isn't that what democracy is all about? Or do our security forces now have the ability to override the rule of law?

I am also concerned about phrases such as "needs to identify and back shared values", this suggests to me that anyone who does not comply with the official version of the 'shared values' of the state should be 'isolated and rejected'. Afraid this sounds rather like the rhetoric of totalitarian government such as we might have expected in communist Russia.

What happened to 'Freedom of speech', 'Innocent until proven guilty'?

Yes, we need to protect ourselves from those who may harm us but this does not mean we should give the authorities carte blanche to choose who can say what and silence anyone they disagree with even if they have broken no law - that is a dangerous road to follow.

READ MORE at:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7889631.stm