RSS Feed
January 17th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
When that act was repealed in March 2005, he was released on bail and made
subject to a control order under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
While his appeal against the control order was still pending, in August 2005
he was served with a notice of intention to deport him to Jordan. Qatada
appealed against that decision.
He had been convicted in Jordan, in his absence, of involvement in two
terrorist conspiracies in 1999 and 2000.
The ruling said it was “alleged by the Jordanian authorities that Mr Othman
had sent encouragement from the UK to his followers in Jordan and that that
had incited them to plant the bombs.”
Qatada claimed that, if deported, he would be retried, which would put him at
risk of torture, lengthy pre-trial detention and a “grossly unfair trial
based on evidence obtained by the torture of his co-defendants.”
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) dismissed his appeal, ruling
that Qatada would be protected against torture and ill-treatment by the
agreement negotiated between the UK and Jordan, which set out a detailed
series of assurances.
SIAC also found that the retrial would not be in total denial of his right to
a fair trial.
The Court of Appeal partially granted Qatada’s appeal and found that there was
a risk that torture evidence would be used against him if he were returned
to Jordan and that that would violate the international prohibition on
torture and would result in a “flagrant denial of justice” in breach of
Article Six of the European Convention on Human Rights.
On 18 February 2009 the House of Lords upheld SIAC’s findings. They found that
the diplomatic assurances would protect Qatada from being tortured. They
also found that the risk that evidence obtained by torture would be used in
the criminal proceedings in Jordan would not amount to a flagrant denial of
justice.
In the House of Lords ruling, Lord Phillips accepted that a Jordanian court
might use evidence against Qatada that had been extracted by torture and
said there was little doubt that a similar trial held in Britain would
breach his human rights.
But he said Britain was “not in a position to regulate the conduct of trials
in the foreign countries from which aliens come and to which they may have
to be deported” and would only be in breach of the European Convention of
Human Rights if there was a “real risk” that Qatada would suffer a “flagrant
denial of justice.”
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
