This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/28/world/europe/british-judges-to-rule-on-deporting-terror-suspect.html
The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Islamic Preacher Wins Battle Against Deportation from Britain | Islamic Preacher Wins Battle Against Deportation from Britain |
| (about 3 hours later) | |
| LONDON — A militant Islamic preacher wanted in Jordan on terrorism charges won the latest of many legal battles to remain in Britain on Wednesday when senior appeal judges upheld an earlier ruling that his human rights would be violated if he was sent to Jordan for trial. | LONDON — A militant Islamic preacher wanted in Jordan on terrorism charges won the latest of many legal battles to remain in Britain on Wednesday when senior appeal judges upheld an earlier ruling that his human rights would be violated if he was sent to Jordan for trial. |
| The ruling offered the British authorities a humiliating defeat in their long-standing effort to deport a preacher who has been described as a senior operative of Al Qaeda and as “a truly dangerous person.” | |
| The government had challenged a ruling last November by an immigration panel that the preacher, known as Abu Qatada, would lose his right to a fair trial under European rights law if returned to Jordan. He faces a retrial there after being convicted in his absence in two bombing plots in 1999 and 2000. In recent years, he has spent much of his time in Britain either in detention or under other restrictions, resisting government efforts to deport him. | The government had challenged a ruling last November by an immigration panel that the preacher, known as Abu Qatada, would lose his right to a fair trial under European rights law if returned to Jordan. He faces a retrial there after being convicted in his absence in two bombing plots in 1999 and 2000. In recent years, he has spent much of his time in Britain either in detention or under other restrictions, resisting government efforts to deport him. |
| The case has hinged on whether evidence to be used in a Jordanian courtroom was likely to have been obtained under torture. But, more broadly, the legal battles are seen as part of a long-running test of Britain’s balance between human rights and national security, pitting demands for his removal against judicial assessments, in Britain and Europe, relating to human rights. | |
| One of the crucial rulings in the case came in January 2012, when the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, decided that evidence against the preacher in the Jordan bombings “had been obtained by torturing one of his co-defendants.” Deporting him would “legitimize the torture of witnesses and suspects,” it said, and “result in a flagrant denial of justice.” | |
| In the latest tussle, the British home secretary, Theresa May, appealed against the November ruling on the ground that Abu Qatada, a man of Palestinian descent whose real name is Omar Mahmoud Mohammed Othman, was a “truly dangerous” person who escaped earlier efforts to send him to Jordan by “errors of law.” But, speaking unanimously, three senior appeal judges rejected Ms. May’s appeal on Wednesday. Ms. May’s office said it would continue efforts to deport the preacher. | |
| “This is not the end of the road,” a Home Office statement said, “and the government remains determined to deport Abu Qatada. We will consider this judgment carefully and plan to seek leave to appeal. In the meantime we continue to work with the Jordanians to address the outstanding legal issues preventing deportation.” | “This is not the end of the road,” a Home Office statement said, “and the government remains determined to deport Abu Qatada. We will consider this judgment carefully and plan to seek leave to appeal. In the meantime we continue to work with the Jordanians to address the outstanding legal issues preventing deportation.” |
| After the November ruling, Mr. Othman, 52, was first freed then rearrested, accused of violating bail terms that included a 16-hour curfew, electronic tagging, a ban on Internet use and prohibitions on meeting some people. The police also searched his home in London and said officers were investigating “extremist material.” | |
| At a recent court hearing, Edward Fitzgerald, representing Mr. Othman, said there was “concrete and compelling evidence” that his likely co-defendants in Jordan had been tortured, invalidating their evidence. | At a recent court hearing, Edward Fitzgerald, representing Mr. Othman, said there was “concrete and compelling evidence” that his likely co-defendants in Jordan had been tortured, invalidating their evidence. |
| But James Eadie, a lawyer for the government, said there was no reason to believe that Jordanian judges would ignore constitutional provisions prohibiting “clearly and expressly the use of torture and the reliance on any statement obtained under duress, including torture.” | But James Eadie, a lawyer for the government, said there was no reason to believe that Jordanian judges would ignore constitutional provisions prohibiting “clearly and expressly the use of torture and the reliance on any statement obtained under duress, including torture.” |
| In their ruling on Wednesday, the appeal judges said the immigration panel last November “was entitled to conclude that there is a real risk that the impugned statements will be admitted in evidence at a retrial and that, in consequence, there is a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice.” | In their ruling on Wednesday, the appeal judges said the immigration panel last November “was entitled to conclude that there is a real risk that the impugned statements will be admitted in evidence at a retrial and that, in consequence, there is a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice.” |
| The judges said they accepted that Mr. Othman was regarded as a “very dangerous person” but argued that that was not a “relevant consideration” under human rights laws. | |
| The British effort to return Mr. Othman is part of a drive to remove high-profile figures accused of being rallying points for militancy. | The British effort to return Mr. Othman is part of a drive to remove high-profile figures accused of being rallying points for militancy. |
| In October, after a separate series of legal battles, another firebrand preacher, known as Abu Hamza al-Masri, was sent to the United States, where he has pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiring in a 1998 kidnapping of tourists in Yemen and an effort to set up a terrorist training camp in Oregon. | |
| Since the late 1990s, when some European intelligence services began mockingly referring to the British capital as “Londonistan,” the British authorities have been trying to shake off a perception that their major cities had inadvertently become safe and fertile breeding grounds for Islamic extremism. | Since the late 1990s, when some European intelligence services began mockingly referring to the British capital as “Londonistan,” the British authorities have been trying to shake off a perception that their major cities had inadvertently become safe and fertile breeding grounds for Islamic extremism. |
| Mr. Othman’s stubborn resistance has angered some British politicians who object to his presence and to the calculation by lawmakers that his legal fees have cost the authorities around $1.5 million. | |
| “Today’s decision is hugely disappointing,” said London’s mayor, Boris Johnson, a Conservative. “Abu Qatada’s deportation to Jordan is long overdue and it’s utter madness that we can’t get shot of this man.” | “Today’s decision is hugely disappointing,” said London’s mayor, Boris Johnson, a Conservative. “Abu Qatada’s deportation to Jordan is long overdue and it’s utter madness that we can’t get shot of this man.” |
| “The British government must continue, and I am sure will continue, to work with the Jordanians to bring about his departure as quickly as possible,” he said. | “The British government must continue, and I am sure will continue, to work with the Jordanians to bring about his departure as quickly as possible,” he said. |
| But the ruling also fed partisan rivalries between the dominant Conservatives and the Labour opposition, exposing Ms. May to broadsides from Yvette Cooper, the opposition’s home affairs spokeswoman, who accused the government of using flawed tactics to counter Mr. Othman’s legal maneuvers. | But the ruling also fed partisan rivalries between the dominant Conservatives and the Labour opposition, exposing Ms. May to broadsides from Yvette Cooper, the opposition’s home affairs spokeswoman, who accused the government of using flawed tactics to counter Mr. Othman’s legal maneuvers. |
| “There is cross-party agreement about the importance of deporting Abu Qatada and protecting the public,” Ms. Cooper said in a statement. “Everyone agrees that the court processes have taken too long. “But we cannot afford further confusion or mistakes.” | |
Stephen Castle contributed reporting from London. | Stephen Castle contributed reporting from London. |