Can't deport Abu Qatada.
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=190767
Printed Date: 04 December 2025 at 4:07am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Can't deport Abu Qatada.
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Subject: Can't deport Abu Qatada.
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 8:24pm
|
So in a story that I can see FOX getting their hands on over your neck of the woods, Muslim cleric and accused terrorist conspirator has had his appeal fighting deportation to Jordan upheld. He's not going anywhere based on "a real risk" that evidence gained in Jordan through torture will be used against him in his retrial for his role in a bomb attack. Now I see the typical reaction being the usual "Human rights and PC gone mad!" but seeing as Europe may have a traditionally different stance on this kind of thing I felt like your ideas could get a good debate going. I actually took some time to read the http://www.siac.tribunals.gov.uk/Documents/Othman_substantive_judgment.pdf" rel="nofollow - judgement and also read the usual http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20274354" rel="nofollow - comments from the public. and reckon people are extremely quick to jump on the bandwagon with this one. It seems that everything possible has been done to get rid of this knob but the intricacies and clarity of the law make it almost impossible. So in short, In the case of a terror suspect. How do you guys see the issue? (on a broader sense as you may not be familiar with the story) This is almost the anti Guantanamo approach that Britain and the EU has become known for and always causes so much debate. Is the law stopping things from getting done?
|
Replies:
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 8:32pm
| It sounds like they're making sure they don't screw up the re-trial. It'd be great to try our Gitmo detainees in civilian court, but too much evidence would have to be thrown out. I see this as a move away from that and a step towards bringing terrorism back to a law-enforcement realm than a military one, which I believe is the reason they didn't start dumping details about Benghazi, they didn't want to comment on an ongoing criminal case. This guy won't be able to sneeze w/o the government hearing it. We could always just plant a tracking device on him, give him tickets to Yemen and hunt him with flying robots. |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 8:44pm
| Why try them? When they can hold them indefinitely. |
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 8:55pm
|
Well the civilian court issue is geared towards the Jordanian authorities as the executive and the judiciary branches are often in bed together on certain issues and without it we couldn't get the apparent assurances we need. This was a point that Britain made in order to get the extradition cleared through the European court of human rights. Basically everything is in place except from a small but important part of the Jordanian Code of criminal procedure that is under debate as to whether a statement given by a co-accused (which in this case is alleged to have been obtained through torture) can/will be admitted into evidence against Qatada. If this evidence is used then the UK will have deported him to face proceedings with a "real risk" article 6 of the European convention of human rights with regards to knowing that evidence gained through torture will be used against him would be breached. Even if the torture is indirect and simply alleged.
Bugger that.
|
impulse418 wrote:Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 9:06pm
|
Did.... did Scotchy just write all of that? Is there actually a uni-educated and extremely intelligent young Scotsman under the facade of beer-swilling, gypo-tart chasing, silly-cow insulting wild man we all love? Seriously though. Haven't looked into the case enough and I'm too damned tired at the moment to comment, but will come back to it tomorrow. The short of it is, it seems to be a pretty huge tax burden on the people of Great Britain. They're estimating something like $500k so for simply for the various arrests and time in British prisons? Also, seems like the key point in all of the deportation talk is that they want to make sure he's not going to be treated inhumanely when he reaches Jordan (good luck on that one!) Sticky situation definitely. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 9:15pm
|
Yeah tonight was the first time I actually looked into it. The case has been around here for a while but I was only compelled to have a look when I saw the result of the appeal. So a lot of what I said, I may have made up. |
Posted By: stick_boy_2002
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 9:50pm
so basically you are just quoting fox news? honestly i havent read any thing on this, but the way i feel on torture (or advanced interrogation techniques) is unless you are some how trained to take that sort of punishment. eventually you are just going to say what the tourters whant to hear. ------------- 
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 12 November 2012 at 11:15pm
If you didn't say it, I was going to. I'm astonished. And pleased to find that we now have another law nerd on the forum. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 15 November 2012 at 12:09pm
Yeah in most cases I agree. Especially if the co-accused has been rumbled and could perhaps save his own skin from saying all manner of things. There is a precedent in similar cases in Jordan of being spared the death penalty because you have co-operated with investigations. That in itself is why I think that in much of the case law used in this one the group have given up other members after they have been caught. Doesn't seem to fit with the image of traditional Jihadists. Surely we expect a more "you'll never take me alive! I'd die rather than jeopardise my brothers on their holy mission" patter from these guys Now at no point have the co-accused actually provided sufficient medical ergo legal evidence to back up that they were tortured. Although much of the decision making process took place in closed court due to ongoing MI5 interest. It could be that it's a method used in the past in Jordan or the closed court got more info on it. As torture is completely off limits and explicitly against the Jordanian constitution.
'Fraid not, although it is something I've been meaning to get around to.
 Yeah most of my teachers have put me at an extreme of sorts in the past. Not necessarily the upper. |