Wait continues in Government bid to deport radical preacher

The Government must wait further to hear if it can deport a radical preacher who is bidding to stay in the UK on human rights grounds.
Abu Qatada and Theresa May.Abu Qatada and Theresa May.
Abu Qatada and Theresa May.

The Court of Appeal last night reserved judgment on a bid by Home Secretary Theresa May to overturn a decision allowing Abu Qatada to stay in the UK.

Mrs May’s legal team submitted in a one-day hearing in London that he was a “truly dangerous” individual who escaped deportation through “errors of law”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The cleric has used human rights laws to fight deportation for several years, running up a legal bill unofficially estimated at more than £500,000.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) decided in November that Qatada could not be removed to Jordan, where he was convicted of terror charges in his absence in 1999.

Siac judges said there was a “real risk” that evidence from Qatada’s former co-defendants Abu Hawsher and Al-Hamasher, who were allegedly tortured, could be used against him at a retrial, breaching his human rights.

James Eadie QC, appearing for Mrs May, said the Siac decision should be quashed and the Jordanian courts could be trusted.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“The Jordanian courts will consider all the evidence,” Mr Eadie told appeal judges.

He argued the Siac judges, chaired by Mr Justice Mitting, had taken an “erroneous” view of the position in Jordan and the legal tests that had to be applied.

Mr Eadie said the Jordanian constitution “prohibits clearly and expressly the use of torture and the reliance on any statement obtained under duress, including torture”.

He said there was no reason to believe that Jordanian judges would not take into account whether evidence could not be relied upon because it had been obtained by torture.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Edward Fitzgerald QC, appearing for Qatada, now in his early 50s, argued that the Siac ruling was right and there was “concrete and compelling evidence” that Qatada’s co-defendants were tortured into providing evidence.

There was “a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice” and of that evidence being used against his client, he said.

He described Siac’s findings as “entirely reasonable and rational” and accused the Home Secretary of “seeking to create points of law where none in fact exist”.

Mr Fitzgerald said there was now a series of court decisions which all said there was at least “a real risk” that confessions by Al-Hamasher and Abu Hawsher would be admitted in evidence against Qatada.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mrs May has described Qatada as “a dangerous man, a suspected terrorist, who is accused of serious crime in his home country of Jordan”.

He was granted bail after three Siac judges – including chairman Mr Justice Mitting – blocked his deportation and he was released from HMP Long Lartin, to return to his family home.

However, on Friday he was returned to Belmarsh prison after his home was searched last week.

A judge ordered on Saturday that he should remain in custody after hearing “strong prima facie evidence” that mobile telephones or communications equipment had been switched on.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Qatada’s strict bail conditions include a 22-hour home curfew and restrictions on his ability to communicate with others. A further hearing relating to his bail is expected on March 21.

Qatada was born in Bethlehem in the West Bank at a time when it was occupied by Jordan. Over the years, he has been described as an Islamic “preacher of hate” but has never been charged with a crime in the UK.

His wife and five children recently won an injunction preventing protesters demonstrating outside their house.

It is understood that, since last November, the Government has been seeking further assurances and, as part of the process, Security Minister James Brokenshire was in Amman for more talks last week.

Following a one-day appeal hearing, Lord Dyson, the Master of the Rolls, sitting with Lord Justice Richards and Lord Justice Elias, said the court would take time to consider its decision.

Related topics: