news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3450201.stm

Living up to the government's love of pre-emptive strikes, David Blunkett is proposing tough new anti-terror laws to replace his last batch of tough new anti-terror laws. I think we can shorten the title, because these laws belong in the Star Chamber, not a modern courtroom.

Blunkett proposes changing the burden of evidence from "beyond reasonable doubt" to "the balance of probabilities". He proposes secret courts that deny defence council the chance to see evidence against the accused.

You don't even need to have commit a crime to be hauled in front of the drumhead. Says Blunkett: "We have to have prevention under a new category which is to intervene before the act is committed, rather than do so by due process after the act is committed when it's too late."

We already have 14 foreign terrorist suspects held indefinitely without charge in British jails.

In the 17th century, those who stood accused of high treason were presumed guilty. They had no right to see the charges against them. They had no right to council in court. They had no right to swear witnesses in their defence. Seems new Labour again feel "the hand of history" on their shoulders.