The law of the knee-jerk

Just weeks after English hooligans marred the Euro 2000 football tournament, Jack Straw is hitting back. But is such swift action always wise? By BBC News Online's Ryan Dilley.

The wheels of justice seldom whiz around in a mad blur. Vexing as this may sometimes be, the legal system is usually anything but rash.

But now and again the pace can dramatically quicken, especially when government chooses to strike while the iron is hot.

Will anti-hooligan legislation prove an own goal?

So it is with Home Secretary Jack Straw's latest efforts to curb English football hooligans abroad.

The initiative comes hard on the heels of the violence wrought by England fans during Euro 2000, and within a whisker of Fifa's decision on where to stage the 2006 World Cup.

The government hopes its new proposals will ensure the hooligan element can never again run riot on foreign shores.

However, legislating for a problem still so raw in the national psyche has its dangers, says Steve Wedd from the Criminal Law Solicitors' Association.

"If you act while still white hot with anger, your response will usually be the wrong one."

Hounded: Woofie was deemed a dangerous dog

As a rule of thumb, Mr Wedd says the longer a piece of legislation takes to pass into law, the better it is.

"From a minister thinking up a law while sitting in the bath to it finally being implemented can take two, maybe even five, years."

While this drawn-out process can cause laws to become "stale" before they come into force, Mr Wedd says it produces the best and most successful legal results.

Hurried legislation invariably follows headline-grabbing events.

A spate of dog attacks on children and a rash of shrill editorials decrying the influx of now infamous American pitbulls into the UK resulted in 1991's Dangerous Dogs Act.

Scatter shot: Will gun laws avert another tragedy?

Often held up as the prime example of a "hard case, making bad law", the act left courts having to ponder the ancestry of dogs brought into the dock.

By 1998, public opinion turned against the law when Woofie, a boxer-collie cross, was sentenced to death for barking at a postman.

Campaigners, including Brigitte Bardot, finally won the dog a reprieve.

Gun ban

After Thomas Hamilton killed 16 Dunblane school children and their teacher in 1996, moves to outlaw handguns rapidly ensued.

Within 18 months of the tragedy, all large-calibre handguns (later followed by smaller weapons) in private hands were deemed illegal.

The Dunblane shootings prompted calls for action

While only actor Charlton Heston, president of America's National Rifle Association, said the law was motivated by "hysteria", others have questioned its effectiveness.

"I doubt injuring the private, social and sporting life of the many people who owned guns will stop another maniac getting his hands on a weapon," says Mr Wedd.

Parliament has tried to temper its use of swift legislation in the past.

Swift action

The Prevention of Terrorism Act was drafted while the nation was still reeling from the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings, which killed 21 people.

"It was a hasty piece of law. It was so draconian, so fierce and affected so many people that Parliament refused to believe it would be needed for more than a year. It had to be returned for re-approval every year," says Mr Wedd.

IRA bombs in Brimingham prompted "dranconian" laws

Professor Carol Harlow, a government expert at the London School of Economics, says hasty legislation reflects politicians' changing self-image.

"Modern governments want to be at the centre of everything, they want to react to everything. That leads them to the shrill conclusion: 'We must legislate!'"

Pushing an idea through Parliament on a wave of favourable public opinion can be counter productive, says Ms Harlow.

"Without proper scrutiny, you land up with inept legislation and endless legal difficulties. Without proper consultation laws can be left riddled with undo-able things."

With Parliament's timetable booked up as much as two years in advance, lack of time has been the best deterrent to "knee-jerk" laws.

However, if cross-party co-operation allows for the shoe-horning of more debates into the schedules, Mr Wedd has some lawyer's advice for those in Westminster.

"Cool down, calm down, reflect."