Procedural Democracy and the Terrorist Threat

• NCJ Number: 83393
• Journal: Police Studies Volume: 4 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1982) Pages: 23-32
• Author(s): A R C Helms
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 10 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The due process and crime control models of the justice system in a democratic society are outlined, and the compromises made with each model in countering terrorism while preserving democratic principles are discussed.

Abstract

The due process model of the justice system focuses upon procedures designed to ensure that innocent persons are protected from the sanctions reserved for the guilty and that the guilty are proven to be so beyond a reasonable doubt. The primary characteristic of this model is its focus on the rights of the individual. The focus of the crime control model is upon the maintenance of public order and the suppression of crime, even to the extent of involving citizens as members of extralegal groups which help maintain order. In countering terrorism from the crime control perspective, the focus on prevention and suppression of crime requires that the system be mobilized before the act occurs. This involves increasing the impenetrability of potential targets to match the capacity of terrorists to penetrate these targets, altering the context in which the terrorist and the target or potential victim operate to increase the odds against a successful terrorist attack, and the use of surveillance tactics and intelligence gathering that expose preparatory terrorist activities. These methods challenge the due process model in their strong presumption of criminal behavior prior to trial and even prior to the commission of a criminal act. The privacy and freedom of citizens is restricted by the presumption that large numbers of citizens are possible terrorists. The challenge in a free society is to establish the broad limits of freedom which cannot be abolished and to identify those rights which may be suspended temporarily to counter a serious threat to public order. Such measures should be regularly monitored to prevent abuse. Twenty-three footnotes and 16 bibliographic listings are provided.