Last week a British court ruled that two terrorism suspects could not be deported to their homeland of Pakistan because of the likelihood of them being tortured there.
The suspects in question were arrested in Operation Pathway last year, which was described as stopping a “very big terrorist plot” by then prime minister Gordon Brown. No evidence was found to be able to prosecute any of the eleven people arrested though.
This has led to legal limbo where the state still sees these men as a threat. Pressure is being put on the new Tory and Lib Dem government to continue Labour’s control order regime, effectively placing the two remaining suspects who have not been successfully deported to Pakistan under permanent house arrest, even though they opposed it in opposition.
Ming Campbell QC MP was on Question Time praising the “integrity of the process” which had led to the conclusion whereby the men could not be deported. “Integrity” was a strange word to use about a process coming after the normal legal avenues of evidence, charges and trial have been exhausted. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission is a secret court hearing secret evidence which the accused does not have access to.
Labour’s justificication of the control order regime is that it is a necessary measure for people who cannot be prosecuted. I feel very uncomfortable hearing words like this. Placing people under house arrest because the state does not have evidence to put someone on trial and get a conviction doesn't sound fair. Ironically, this "evidence" may include material gained from torture in places like Pakistan.
Furthermore, given the wideranging anti-terrorism offences that have been brought in over the last few years, the government have to explain how after you have trawled through the home, workplace, computers, emails, phone records and reading materials of an “Al-Qaeda operative”, that there’s nothing you can prosecute over.
There has been very little comment on the Islamic Republic of Pakistan torturing its own people. In the same week the state banned Facebook because of people organising a “Draw Muhammad Day” on it. A better way or honouring the Prophet would surely be to uphold basic human dignity. Disappointingly, there doesn't seem appetite amongst the Pakistani diaspora to take this issue up.
The suspects in question were arrested in Operation Pathway last year, which was described as stopping a “very big terrorist plot” by then prime minister Gordon Brown. No evidence was found to be able to prosecute any of the eleven people arrested though.
This has led to legal limbo where the state still sees these men as a threat. Pressure is being put on the new Tory and Lib Dem government to continue Labour’s control order regime, effectively placing the two remaining suspects who have not been successfully deported to Pakistan under permanent house arrest, even though they opposed it in opposition.
Ming Campbell QC MP was on Question Time praising the “integrity of the process” which had led to the conclusion whereby the men could not be deported. “Integrity” was a strange word to use about a process coming after the normal legal avenues of evidence, charges and trial have been exhausted. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission is a secret court hearing secret evidence which the accused does not have access to.
Labour’s justificication of the control order regime is that it is a necessary measure for people who cannot be prosecuted. I feel very uncomfortable hearing words like this. Placing people under house arrest because the state does not have evidence to put someone on trial and get a conviction doesn't sound fair. Ironically, this "evidence" may include material gained from torture in places like Pakistan.
Furthermore, given the wideranging anti-terrorism offences that have been brought in over the last few years, the government have to explain how after you have trawled through the home, workplace, computers, emails, phone records and reading materials of an “Al-Qaeda operative”, that there’s nothing you can prosecute over.
There has been very little comment on the Islamic Republic of Pakistan torturing its own people. In the same week the state banned Facebook because of people organising a “Draw Muhammad Day” on it. A better way or honouring the Prophet would surely be to uphold basic human dignity. Disappointingly, there doesn't seem appetite amongst the Pakistani diaspora to take this issue up.
This could happen to anyone of us, regardless of race or religion.
If they've got evidence the authorities can't use in court then they need to look at how they go about collecting evidence. If the evidence is too weak, or doesn't exist, then ... well innocent until proven guilty applies, and that demands a trial to establish one way or the other.
This isn't just an issue here in the UK, it is a real problem in the US too.
Posted by: Mary | 26 May 2010 at 05:30 PM
Osama,
Well, I'm against deporting folk where there is even a smidgeon of evidence that they might be tortured. Especially when we, the UK, cannot find any evidence against them. But, even so.
I think we have a responsibility to reject any such requests. The Garry McKinnon case comes to mind.
It is also intolerable that folk should be 'found guilty' without reasoned, or reasonable evidence.
We give up our liberties at our peril.
I would assume that, taking what I have said the wrong way, I could be trawled and found guilty of something. It is no way to run a society. You may, or may not, agree that the Nottingham Airport bomber is a victim of bureaucracy:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/16/britain-turns-serious-david-mitchell
_______________________________
You and I have both said and done things we probably regret. There ought to be a limitation, or 'time out' on that. Sadly, the Google diggers do not see it that way.
Chris Mounsey, the 'leader' of the very tiny Libertarian Party UK, appeared on the Andrew Marr show, and because he ran a sweary blog - think Mr Eugenides for instance - he was completely annihilated.
His reaction, not that it will do him any good, was to completely eliminate his history on the internet.
Just saying.
There are some very mouthy idiots out there....
Mainly assembled around Harry's Place, but not exclusively so.
Least, that's what I think...
Posted by: douglas clark | 28 May 2010 at 05:32 AM