Crucifixion is an easy life.
Knuckle deep within the borderline. This may hurt a little but it's something you'll get used to.
Just this once, can we hear it for the Jordanian justice system? Theirs is a country where freedom of speech is heavily restricted and torturers are able to operate with impunity, and yet even with such things in their favour they still couldn't manage to convict Abu Qatada on terrorism charges.
For those who've (sadly) followed the entire sorry process, this doesn't exactly come as a surprise. With the tainted testimony from those tortured expunged, the evidence for everyone's favourite Uncle Albert lookalike (stretching it a bit here) being involved in the 1998 bombings in the country was wafer thin. In fact, there was such a lack of almost anything incriminating against Qatada it could be said to mirror the trial of the al-Jazeera journalists in Egypt. Jihadica (not exactly the most neutral source) reports that few if any of the witnesses called knew Qatada personally, and rarely even touched on the charges he was facing. Going by this it seems equally unlikely he will be found guilty of involvement in the "Millennium plot", despite there being a smidgen more circumstantial evidence linking him to it, at least according to SIAC.
It bears repeating then that if it hadn't been for the courts, both here and in Strasbourg repeatedly blocking the attempts by successive governments to deport Qatada back to Jordan without receiving adequate assurances he wouldn't face "evidence" acquired as a result of mistreatment, an innocent man would now most likely be enjoying the hospitality provided at the Jordanian king's finest prison establishments. Qatada is without doubt an utterly repellent individual, a supporter and apologist for terrorist groups, as proved by his defence of the al-Nusra Front in Syria, but just as he never faced any charges in this country, managing to stay on the right side of the law, he is not a terrorist himself.
Our determination to get rid of Qatada also leaves Jordan with the problem of what to do with him if he is indeed also found innocent of the remaining charges. While here he was relatively limited in his ability to propagandise, with leaked interviews from prison about the only way he had of communicating with supporters. In Jordan journalists have spoken to him at the end of court sessions, while simply being in the dock has given him the opportunity to speak out. Not that this bothers our politicians, far more concerned with making clear there is no possibility he could return if found innocent. Might it have been an idea to try and build a case against him back here, rather than just wash our hands of the man we gave asylum in the first place?
Don't be silly.
Just this once, can we hear it for the Jordanian justice system? Theirs is a country where freedom of speech is heavily restricted and torturers are able to operate with impunity, and yet even with such things in their favour they still couldn't manage to convict Abu Qatada on terrorism charges.
For those who've (sadly) followed the entire sorry process, this doesn't exactly come as a surprise. With the tainted testimony from those tortured expunged, the evidence for everyone's favourite Uncle Albert lookalike (stretching it a bit here) being involved in the 1998 bombings in the country was wafer thin. In fact, there was such a lack of almost anything incriminating against Qatada it could be said to mirror the trial of the al-Jazeera journalists in Egypt. Jihadica (not exactly the most neutral source) reports that few if any of the witnesses called knew Qatada personally, and rarely even touched on the charges he was facing. Going by this it seems equally unlikely he will be found guilty of involvement in the "Millennium plot", despite there being a smidgen more circumstantial evidence linking him to it, at least according to SIAC.
It bears repeating then that if it hadn't been for the courts, both here and in Strasbourg repeatedly blocking the attempts by successive governments to deport Qatada back to Jordan without receiving adequate assurances he wouldn't face "evidence" acquired as a result of mistreatment, an innocent man would now most likely be enjoying the hospitality provided at the Jordanian king's finest prison establishments. Qatada is without doubt an utterly repellent individual, a supporter and apologist for terrorist groups, as proved by his defence of the al-Nusra Front in Syria, but just as he never faced any charges in this country, managing to stay on the right side of the law, he is not a terrorist himself.
Our determination to get rid of Qatada also leaves Jordan with the problem of what to do with him if he is indeed also found innocent of the remaining charges. While here he was relatively limited in his ability to propagandise, with leaked interviews from prison about the only way he had of communicating with supporters. In Jordan journalists have spoken to him at the end of court sessions, while simply being in the dock has given him the opportunity to speak out. Not that this bothers our politicians, far more concerned with making clear there is no possibility he could return if found innocent. Might it have been an idea to try and build a case against him back here, rather than just wash our hands of the man we gave asylum in the first place?
Don't be silly.
Labels: Abu Qatada, Abu Qutada, European Court of Human Rights, human rights, jihadists, Jordan, Special Immigration Appeals Commission, terror, terror suspects, Theresa May, torture
| Permalink
Post a Comment