THE WAR ON TERROR
Justice Sullivan is the latest judge to render Labour’s purported war on terror a farce. He has ruled, in the High Court, that an Arab known as MB, who had been granted British citizenship after arriving in the UK with his family in the 1990s, should not be subject to a control order preventing him from travelling abroad.
The control order, which included the removal of his passport, was imposed as MB was believed by the security services to be trying to travel to Iraq in order to attack British and US troops as a part of the insurgency.
MB had been stopped by the police and MI5 at Manchester airport. He had claimed that he was going on holiday to Syria. He claimed that he had been subject to racist abuse by MI5.
MB, who had missed his flight from Manchester, travelled to Heathrow to catch another flight to the middle east. But he had been followed by MI5 and was detained under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act.
MB complained that his human rights had been broken.
Justice Sullivan agreed and pronounced that the imposition of the control order was an ‘affront to justice’ and that the Government’s anti-terror legislation was ‘incompatible’ with the Human Rights Act:
One of Justice Sullivan’s complaints was that MB had been detained by a decision of the Home Secretary without judicial involvement.
Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, was jubilant:
The control order is to remain in force pending the outcome of an appeal by the government.
Meanwhile, 3 Appeal Court judges have unanimously ruled that David Hicks, aka the ‘Australian Taliban’, who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and who currently resides at Guantanamo Bay, is entitled to claim British citizenship. Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, had been trying to block Hicks’s application for a British passport. Hicks’s mother was born in London.
The US claims that Hicks attended an Al Qaeda training camp and of fighting against British and US troops. The Australian government has refused to press for his release.
It is now expected that Jack Straw will be trying to secure Hicks’s release. No doubt a whole host of so-called human rights lawyers and activists will be working themselves into a lather over Hicks’s rights [as well as earning a nice chunk of legal aid fees for themselves].
We are therefore in the ridiculous situation where the so-called war on terror is subject to judicial approval, that immigrants are being granted and can retain British citizenship no matter the extent to which the hate this country and mean us harm, that immigrants have a human right to kill British troops abroad, that such immigrants cannot be deported but they are free to leave as they please, that such immigrants cannot be subject to control orders or be detained if they choose to remain in the UK, that even those foreigners who have taken up arms with Al Qaeda against British troops can demand British citizenship even though they were not born here, and the Human Rights Act is cited by unelected and unaccountable judges in order to overturn decisions of elected politicians.
So much for the war on terror.
The control order, which included the removal of his passport, was imposed as MB was believed by the security services to be trying to travel to Iraq in order to attack British and US troops as a part of the insurgency.
MB had been stopped by the police and MI5 at Manchester airport. He had claimed that he was going on holiday to Syria. He claimed that he had been subject to racist abuse by MI5.
MB, who had missed his flight from Manchester, travelled to Heathrow to catch another flight to the middle east. But he had been followed by MI5 and was detained under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act.
MB complained that his human rights had been broken.
Justice Sullivan agreed and pronounced that the imposition of the control order was an ‘affront to justice’ and that the Government’s anti-terror legislation was ‘incompatible’ with the Human Rights Act:
‘The issue raised in these proceedings is whether the Act gives the respondent the fair hearing to which he is entitled. The answer to that question is no.’
One of Justice Sullivan’s complaints was that MB had been detained by a decision of the Home Secretary without judicial involvement.
Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, was jubilant:
‘This completely scandalous system of punishment without trial is definitely in tatters. This policy - like its predecessor legislation, the Belmarsh disgrace - has been rightly and roundly condemned by the High Court.’
The control order is to remain in force pending the outcome of an appeal by the government.
Meanwhile, 3 Appeal Court judges have unanimously ruled that David Hicks, aka the ‘Australian Taliban’, who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and who currently resides at Guantanamo Bay, is entitled to claim British citizenship. Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, had been trying to block Hicks’s application for a British passport. Hicks’s mother was born in London.
The US claims that Hicks attended an Al Qaeda training camp and of fighting against British and US troops. The Australian government has refused to press for his release.
It is now expected that Jack Straw will be trying to secure Hicks’s release. No doubt a whole host of so-called human rights lawyers and activists will be working themselves into a lather over Hicks’s rights [as well as earning a nice chunk of legal aid fees for themselves].
We are therefore in the ridiculous situation where the so-called war on terror is subject to judicial approval, that immigrants are being granted and can retain British citizenship no matter the extent to which the hate this country and mean us harm, that immigrants have a human right to kill British troops abroad, that such immigrants cannot be deported but they are free to leave as they please, that such immigrants cannot be subject to control orders or be detained if they choose to remain in the UK, that even those foreigners who have taken up arms with Al Qaeda against British troops can demand British citizenship even though they were not born here, and the Human Rights Act is cited by unelected and unaccountable judges in order to overturn decisions of elected politicians.
So much for the war on terror.
posted by erc @ 9:42 pm
<< Home