[Barry the Sprout]

MagiK - it destroys the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Should you wish to say nothing, and then the prosecution put forward a bad case against you then you will be assumed guilty. Even if the case against you is flimsy you will be assumed guilty by the judge and jury. So the principle is effectively guilty until you speak and prove yourself innocent.

What about people who don't speak the language very well, or people who will be under threat if they do speak what they know. Just because you are silent does not mean you are guilty. Basically what you advocate is the state having the ability to arrest anyone and make them prove their innocence. That is basically what happens over here (particularly with reference to suspected IRA members who the law was brought in specifically to penalise). Not a system I like, not a system Amnesty International like, not a system the European court on human rights likes, and not a system Charter 88 like either. I can understand your argument, I just think there are more worrying conotations of it.