Abu Qatada release: Cameron 'fed up'

  Forum Editor 18:20 13 Nov 2012

There does seem to be something quite ridiculous about a situation in which a man who is - to use our Prime Minister's own words "..has no right to be here, we believe he's a threat to our country," and yet cannot be expelled by us.

We literally cannot put this individual on a plane out of here because someone sitting in a court in Strasbourg decided that he would not get a fair trial in Jordan, where he's wanted.

I'm well-known for championing the rule of law, but there are times when I wonder if we haven't lost sight of the ball, and this is one of them. In 21 days our government must either come up with a valid legal reason for an appeal against the ruling or release Abu Qatada back into the community. It's a cast iron guarantee that his lawyers will challenge every inch of the way.

Perhaps we should send the man to Strasbourg, and let them have the problem.

  TonyV 18:33 13 Nov 2012

No, send him to back to Jordan and wait for the backlash. After all that is where he belongs, not here. But there again, we will keep him in ways he would like to be kept!! Almost everything paid for by others.

I'd be willing to bet, that once he is back in Jordan, they will not release him back again


  TonyV 18:35 13 Nov 2012

Isn't the saying "The law is an ass"? This decision most certainly proves the point.


  onthelimit1 18:36 13 Nov 2012

The Human Rights saga has got way out of hand. Initially it did prevent some appalling actions, but just abused now at huge cost (and risk) to us. Time for a rethink.

  Flak999 18:38 13 Nov 2012

In the piece quoted it says that the Strasbourg court had found that he could be extradited!

"Earlier this year, judges at the European Court in Strasbourg ruled the cleric would not face ill-treatment if returned to Jordan, citing assurances outlined in a UK-Jordan agreement."

It was the judge in the UK at the Special immigration appeals tribunal that ruled he could not be extradited!

  john bunyan 18:44 13 Nov 2012

Maybe Parliament should pass emergency legislation on this case alone ensuring that Parliament decrees in this case that a special UK law passed by sovereign Parliament cannot be overturned as Parliament is the highest court.

  csqwared 19:06 13 Nov 2012

Human rights? The rights of one man as opposed to the rights of 60 million UK inhabitants!! Can't see it myself. The only place this man should be is in Jordan, we should ignore Strasboursg and just send him back. I wonder what the European ramifications would be, if any?

  TonyV 19:21 13 Nov 2012


The ramifications would be along the lines of what France got fined when they transgressed recently. They were fined €15,000. Money well spent and an awful lot cheaper than keeping him here and paying Lawyers their exorbitant sums.


  Fruit Bat /\0/\ 19:44 13 Nov 2012

If we can't send him to Jordon why can't we send him somewhere else instead?

He has already stated (on film) that his followers should fight "westerners" to the death - so exile him to somewhere in the east.

  Fruit Bat /\0/\ 21:05 13 Nov 2012


I was thinking a lot further east than Essex but about 100 miles east of Essex should be good enough

  morddwyd 21:08 13 Nov 2012

"The rule of law is one thing. But what we are seeing here is a simple perversion of it."

No we're not, we're seeing the application of it, as enacted by politicians, led the the Prime Minister, not necessarily the current one, but successive ones.

The judges don't make the law, the politicians do.

If Cameron is si fed up with the law, let him change it. No-one is better placed.

And don't tell me it's Strasbourg Law, it's British law which makes Strasbourg Law applicable in the UK.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

iPad Air (2019) review

Digital humans aren't just possible - they're essential in today's top games

iMac 21.5in (2019) review

Les meilleures boîtes mails gratuites