The Lords protects civil liberties
- Reasoning
- Peers rejected 42 days' detention without charge.
- Evidence
- They voted 309 to 118.
- How it supports the argument
- The government dropped the plan.
ApprovedConcludedEvent
Title
The Lords defeats 42 days' detention (2008)
Date
13 October 2008
Relevant topic(s)
Democracy and participationRightsThe constitutionHow the constitution has changed since 1997
What happened?
Gordon Brown's government sought to extend pre-charge detention for terror suspects to 42 days. It narrowly passed the Commons in June 2008.
In October 2008 the House of Lords rejected it by a large majority, and the government dropped the plan.
- In June 2008 the government survived in the Commons only because of nine DUP votes, after 36 Labour MPs rebelled.
- On 13 October 2008 peers rejected the 42-day measure by 309 votes to 118, a margin of 191.
- The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, announced the retreat in a Commons statement, keeping the proposal available for a future emergency in separate legislation.
- Opponents in the Lords included the former Attorney General Lord Goldsmith and former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer; Lord Dear, a former chief constable, called the measure 'a shabby charade'.
Why is it politically significant?
The defeat shows the unelected House of Lords acting as a check on the executive to protect civil liberties.
How to use
Which arguments does it support?
Which counterarguments exist?
Limits of the evidence
The power was kept in reserve
The government said it would keep the proposal available for a future emergency.
Concepts and connections
Concepts it illustrates
Sources and verification
Event13 October 2008
Added to bank11 November 2026
Last checked11 November 2026
Next check due11 May 2027
- 1Opened
About this example
Is it still current?
Concluded
The development has ended or been reversed, but remains useful evidence.
Why it is in the bank
The key example of the Lords protecting liberty.
- ✓Relevance to the specification
- ✓Strength and reliability of the evidence
- ✓Importance to a wider political debate
- ✓Usefulness in evaluative essays
- ✓Connections to other topics
- ✓Sufficiently current
- ✓Adds something new to the bank
Editorial status
Approved
Signed off for students.
Origin: AI draft (Claude) · Reviewer: Editor
Every fact on this page has been checked against original sources.