Abu Qatada: Questions Remain As To Why Radical Islamic Cleric Has Not Been Charged In UK

Abu Qatada

The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 8/02/2012 15:06 Updated: 8/02/2012 17:03

Once called "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe," 52-year-old Abu Qatada first entered Britain in 1993, claiming asylum from torture from his native Jordan.

In 1999, the cleric was convicted by Jordanian authorities of conspiracy cause explosions related to bombings at an American school. The sentence carried a life term.

He was convicted of a second crime, that of plotting to bomb tourists, and sentenced to a further 15 years a year later. On both occasions, Qatada was tried in absence.

Qatada's extradition from Britain to Jordan was blocked amid fears testimony against him was extracted under torture.

Following 9/11 and the controversial introduction of the indefinite detention of terror suspects in the UK, Qatada went underground. He became increasingly of interest to the British security services after his sermons appeared on videos found at the property of one of the 9/11 bombers. He was finally arrested in 2002 where he remained until 2005.

He was briefly released in 2005, but re-arrested later that year when the home office came to an "understanding" with the Jordanian government facilitating his deportation on the condition of a fair trial.

However, last month the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Qatada could not be extradited to Jordan due to the same concerns over torture testimony.

Despite Theresa May's insistence that Qatada would be kept behind bars until his extradition was secured, the Jordanian's legal team argued that his detention was illegal, a stance upheld by this week's decision to release him on bail.

But after nearly a decade in jail, why has Qatada not been charged? According to campaign group Liberty, placing Qatada on trial could "embarrass the security agencies" who let Qatada into the country in 1993 believing he was not a threat.

"If there is sound untainted evidence against him Qatada should be tried in a British court," said Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty in a statement. "If the threat he poses is so grave surely that would be preferable to sending him back to an unsafe Middle Eastern kingdom anyway?"

If he can't be sent back to Jordan due to "untainted evidence", then what of charges in the UK? If what's claimed about Abu Qatada is true, if he has incited murder and hatred then why can the UK government not bring him to trial on those charges?

Fighting against Qatada's detainment, Ed Fitzgerald QC, representing the cleric, said that his client had been held for more than six years fighting deportation, and nine years overall on the ground that he was a risk to national security.

Speaking at the recent Special Immigration Appeals Commission, he said: "The detention has now gone on for too long to be reasonable or lawful and there is no prospect of the detention ending in any reasonable period.

"However the risk of absconding, however the risk of further offending, there comes a point when it's just too long. There comes a time when it's just too long, however grave the risks."

According to Roger Smith, the director of Justice, there are two issues on why Qatada has not been charged.

Speaking to the Huffington Post UK, he said: “The first question is what exactly has he done? Incitement seems most likely, but maybe they haven’t they nailed him on something sufficiently specific. The second question centers around what links he has had with the security services."

After keeping Qatada under arrest for the best part of a decade, it appears the UK government would rather find a way of transporting the whole mess east for Jordan to deal with rather than hold a trial in the UK that could prove a huge embarrassment for both current and previous governments responsible for Qatada's incarceration.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

Once called "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe," 52-year-old Abu Qatada first entered Britain in 1993, claiming asylum from torture from his native Jordan. In 1999, the cleric was convict...
Once called "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe," 52-year-old Abu Qatada first entered Britain in 1993, claiming asylum from torture from his native Jordan. In 1999, the cleric was convict...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 65
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
11:16 PM on 02/13/2012
Some one else who shouldnt be drawing breath
07:52 AM on 02/09/2012
it just seems strange to me that a man wanted in another country, cannot be sent there to face the charges against him. He is not a british citizen, a bit like the wikke leaks fool, who uses our law and when that does not work, a law from the E U to sit here costing us money. I love the way that when under pressure they run not to a muslim country, a country supporting A Q but to the very country they despise, Because in the long run and deep down inside they kno we have it right, and there thoughts in life are completely wrong. They are cowards of the first degree usually telling the fools who listen to them that there way is the right way. But having no intention of living by that code themselves. It just amazes me the amount of people who come here, and blled our system whilst telling evryone how bad it is to run a country on our values. And for those who think the jury system is a farce a bit like the posters on the Redknapp case without it you have these judges making decisions like these. Blair Brown and many in the present Labour party have much to answer for. As far as a british persons human rights we have none.
05:18 AM on 02/09/2012
Why has Abu Qatada not been charged here? - a fair question. I'm sure the Prevention of Terrorism Act and other statutes would stipulate appropriate offences.

The embarrassment point is real. As part of our pre-trial process the authorities must disclose to the defence all relevant unused material that might help the defence. They can withold 'sensitive material' but only with the consent of a judge. If the judge orders disclosure of sensitive material then the prosecution then has to either disclose the sensitive material to the defence as ordered, or drop the prosecution. These provisions probably don't apply to extraditions because these are not trials as such.

Our security services must surely hold materil about Abu Qatada to support the assertion that he is a threat to national security. They probably also hold similar material provided by other security services overseas. It would undermine international security efforts if some of this material were even shown to a judge, let alone a defence team.

It would discourage overeas agencies from sharing intelligence with us if they saw a risk that this may be forced into the public domain. The consequences of that happening probably outweigh the expediency of prosecuting even Abu Qatada under our legal system.

I have no special take on this case but that's how I read the situation. Our criminal justice system has now become so overloaded with safeguards that it can be against the national interest to prosecute alleged terrorists - ho hum......
05:08 AM on 02/09/2012
Extradition can be a bit of a minefield. The English courts in particular look at the credibility of the requesting state's legal system as part of the Human Rights side of things when considering the merits of an export extradition request. Convictions in absence against the fugitive recorded in the requesting state can cause particular Human Rights difficulties, however supposedly obtained.

I don't know what international right our courts (and now the European Court) have to arrogantly pronounce upon and judge other legal systems in alien societies to our own by our own over-fair standards. The request will have been made under some sort of extradition treaty with Jordan and it's about time we got on with it and honoured our obligations under it as a political proposition, if not a legal one.

The extradition process is not there to decide guilt or innocence. It is supposed to be an executive process to return fugitives to other jurisdictions to face trial, even if convicted in absence. Maybe the UK is a fuguitives' haven!

I don't think the state itself can rely on Human Rights considerations for its own benefit because it is not 'human'. This makes the whole process very lop sided and completely ignores the 'human' subjects which the state exits to nurture and protect.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
omega777
Yellow cake is the Bomb
04:01 AM on 02/09/2012
like Crazy man, Crazy
02:51 AM on 02/09/2012
If the "leadership" is too weak and pathetic to do whats right and send him to Jordan no matter what foreigners say, then send him to america..im sure they'd take him and have plenty of questions for him. Failing that escort him to france, or belgium..or any other bleeding heart country in the EU that tries to block our rights to deport terrorists and terrorist supporters from our own country.
Scum like this doesnt deserve the same rights as normal decent people ie. non terrorists, non abusers of innocent people etc etc.
08:38 AM on 02/09/2012
Bang on mate !
This country is full of liberal appeasers and excusers.
This man should be taken to strassburg and releasd there, to enjoy his 'human rights' and freedom that the courts are so keen on.
What I find strange is why he wants to stay here ? Surely not because ofnthe disgusting amout of benefits he is entitled to ????
We are a joke when it comes to harbouring international terrorists, and subverters.
As soon as these tw4ts are picked up on entry they should be put on the frst available transport and returned to the departure point.
Enough is enough !
01:45 AM on 02/09/2012
Abu Qatada is definitely entitled to claim his human rights but like any of the other human rights grounds, these are qualified and not carte blanché.

If his exercise of his "rights" infringe upon the rights of others, then those rights that he claims become tenuous.

Let the CPC and the other investigative bodies do their homework properly and there would be more than sufficient grounds to prove that Mr. Abu's rights cannot be allowed to put the rights of the greater majority at risk.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Norman Mitchison
12:53 AM on 02/09/2012
If the CPS spent more time pursuing ciminals instead of victims the system might work.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Norman Mitchison
12:46 AM on 02/09/2012
How can anybody expect the inadequate and pathetic CPS to prosecute wrongdoers when they spend most of their time puirsuing the victims?
11:54 PM on 02/08/2012
I think we should deport all these people that diminish the way of life here in `Great Britain`
Abu Qatada , David Cameron, George Osborne, Andrew Lansley, and last but not least, that strong Tory defender of human rights, Theresa May. or may not , depending on what she is told to do.!
01:39 AM on 02/09/2012
And not forgetting Ed Miliband!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickbono
huff is crap
11:24 PM on 02/08/2012
cant charge him with inciting racial hatred , because he is not a white british woman
11:32 PM on 02/08/2012
does anyone of you know the procedure of proving one liable of inciting hatred nad of hate speech? i think not...as you yould definetely speak otherwise.... yes i agree he is a terrorist,he is a "bad" man but human rights come first...now if you dont like get out of the ECHR and then the fun will begin!
11:49 PM on 02/08/2012
Good post my friend, But I would have thought any white person would do !
11:12 PM on 02/08/2012
If one is patient enough he will say something non pc and then we can lock him up again.
concodtob
16 stone athlete and intellectual
06:30 PM on 02/09/2012
You must be joking!The politically correct do-gooders will probably give him a knighthood.
10:27 PM on 02/08/2012
On the one hand you demonstrate and accuse the gov of infringing your human rights when they increase tuition fees or control protesters, but when it comes to foreign people....you immediately start stereoryping someone just becauses hes a muslim. Doesn’t he have a right to liberty like you? Family like you? Right to a fair trial like u? please, werent you terrorists when you were were occupying countries illegally 70-80 years ago? I think most of the people commenting here suffer from hypocritical short memoryism!!!P.S.: The guy hasnt been charged because there is not enough evidence yet! That is the main purpose of imposing a control order (or now a TPIM) i.e.to place a suspect at house arrest in order to get sufficient evidence.
01:45 AM on 02/09/2012
Which is why he should be returned to Jordan!
concodtob
16 stone athlete and intellectual
06:43 PM on 02/09/2012
He has no rights as he came here on a forged passport.He is a terrorist and the evidence against him is extremely sensitive.Sources,informants,and undercover agents and their families would be put at risk if this evidence was disclosed.

70-80 years ago?occupying other countries?What's that got to do with today?I wasn't born 70-80 years ago so what are you going on about.My Grandad was around then and guess what?he was fighting the Nazis in north africa.

If you like Qatada that much then go and live next door to him in his large house payed for by the British taxpayer!Yes,the British taxpayer who this odius man preaches hatred against.It is you who is the hypocrite and completely out of touch.Perhaps you would like a job at the ECHR.
10:23 PM on 02/08/2012
Next he will be claiming British citizenship as he's been here so long and use the ECHR to enforce it.
10:21 PM on 02/08/2012
The reason this nauseating man is still in this country is solely the fault of Tony Blair and his Nu-Labour hypocrites who signed the Human Rights Act in its entriety while carrying out an illegal war in Iraq. Thanks to Blair, we cannot kick Qatada out.

Just remember that at the next election, should your hand hover anywhere near a Labour candidate's name.