Abu Qatada Wins Supreme Court Hearing that Prevents Government from Deporting Him
ABU QATADA WINS SUPREME COURT HEARING THAT PREVENTS GOVERNMENT FROM DEPORTING HIM – It was almost a foregone conclusion that the Supreme Court would uphold the Court of Appeals decision that deporting Abu Qatada to Jordan would be against his human rights and in line with statutory legislation in the Human Rights Act and laws imposed on the British Courts by the European Court on Human Rights (ECHR) there was little doubt that despite the cost to the taxpayer that this would fail.
David Cameron has expressed is exasperation to the Home Office and is now considering temporarily pulling out of the ECHR in order to allow a British Court to overturn the decision and finally deport Abu Qatada.
Currently the Supreme Court’s decision now allows Abu Qatada, a known terrorist who is considered a real and pending threat to the safety of the British public, to remain permanently in the UK which will no doubt also involve the taxpayer having to keep him.
After the Supreme Court ruling the Prime Minister held a high-level meeting in order to find a way of deporting the hate preacher back to his native Jordan where he will stand trial and probably executed for his multiple crimes of terrorism and the murder of thousands of innocent people.
Online the comments from the British public are that we should pull out of Europe, we should scrap the Human Rights Act 1998 and that a bullet would have been a lot cheaper than dragging this terrorist and mass murderer through the courts.
All are valid proposal in my opinion but the sad truth is that the British public determined its own fate through the continuous liberalization of the laws and our quest for being seen as a country of humanitarian people. Being a humanitarian doesn’t mean you have to allow people like Abu Qatada to mock and milk the system, at the expense of the British taxpayer, for all it is worth.
At the high level meeting, which consisted of the Home Secretary, Theresa May, Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling and the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, the question on the table was… ‘Can we consider the controversial option of pulling out of the ECHR, albeit on a temporary basis, to allow us to deport Abu Qatada?’
What worries me is the issue of temporary and no doubt this will not fare well in the eyes of the Coalition government who will no doubt mention that you simply cannot opt-in and opt-out whenever there is something you have an issue with. As Theresa May has vowed to pull out of the ECHR and scrap the Human Rights Act, something that Chris Grayling supports, maybe now is the perfect opportunity and use Abu Qatada as a prime and clear example of why the current system of the Human Rights Act and the interference from the ECHR does not produce rightful justice to the British people.
Better yet why doesn’t the Prime Minister do what he is supposed to do under a democratic system of government – call a referendum and allow the British public to democratically decide?
If Cameron attempt to pull out of the ECHR it would push the Coalition with the Liberal Democrats to a breaking point as they have already made it perfectly clear that they would oppose any move to pull out of the ECHR or furthermore scrap the Human Rights Act. Therefore the only option available is to call a national referendum and let the people decide.
Why has the Government’s bid failed to remove Qatada? Again it was the same argument that the court upheld in that Qatada would be unlikely to receive a fair trial in Jordan that he may be tortured into giving a confession of his alleged roles in terrorist activities.
It has now been 10 years that the Government have been attempting to deport Qatada. It has cost the taxpayer millions in legal aid and government man hours and all have failed – not through the lack of trying but rather the lack of resolve to remove the barriers that have prevented such an action.
Above extract from the Daily Mail which details Abu Qatada’s fight to prevent deportation since 1993.