How much NHS care (or housing, or child protection) has this man cost us already?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20307580

Bung him on a plane anywhere, he has cost us far too much money already. Legal processes that protect terrorists are a farce.

It will probably end going the way of how long it took the UK to ship Hamza to the US. With legal arguements at every single step blocking this current case.

Well at least the Lawyers are getting rich.

Chill37 wrote:It will probably end going the way of how long it took the UK to ship Hamza to the US. With legal arguements at every single step blocking this current case.

It's the same legal arguments that would protect each and every one of us as well. You can't pick and choose which laws apply to which people, surely?

If dragging out such legal proceedings for years really does deprive the UK of NHS care, housing, child protection etc, then simply doing that is a more effective method for a terrorist than bombing.

Bet he laughs himself to sleep every night thinking of the better things the money could have been spent on.

When did he return to the UK? the last I knew he was put on a plane to face charges in America. This hateful being is really taking the proverbial and we are all paying for it!

Except that he has been neither tried or convicted of any charge in the UK, and the case in Jordan would not stand up to scrutiny in the British courts.

This is a witch-hunt and successive governments should have had more sense.

In many ways, and with no apparent time limit into the future, the UK will have to carry the financial and other costs of 'imported' criminals and terrorists. This might have been reduced if competent immigration arrangements, border controls, prisoner repatriation agreements, and legal structures for the circumstances had been put in place quite some years ago.

Post Charly Today at 12:10 pm Are you thinking of Abu Hamza?

Indeed I am Charly ..... makes you wonder though, how many more of 'em are there?!

And yes Cyfrifia, how true.

Dalelad wrote:

Chill37 wrote:It will probably end going the way of how long it took the UK to ship Hamza to the US. With legal arguements at every single step blocking this current case.

It's the same legal arguments that would protect each and every one of us as well. You can't pick and choose which laws apply to which people, surely?

No Im not saying we should pick and choose the laws- far from it. All I'm saying is how hard is it to deport someone. Yes have appeals etc, but in the media it was reported it could be upto 18 months before the next appeal date.

Look how long it took to get Hamza deported with some last last minute appeals on one technical issue or another. Then when that appeal failed there was yet another final last ditch appeal. Theres always more layers epxosed in the process. How many can there be?

Yet speaking of laws how come it the deportation laws are weighed against us when the USA is involved. From my understanding we , the UK, have to provide a mountain of evidence against a suspect. Yet the USA just provides the merest of evidence and the suspects feet doesnt touch the ground!

Chill37 wrote: Yet speaking of laws how come it the deportation laws are weighed against us when the USA is involved. From my understanding we , the UK, have to provide a mountain of evidence against a suspect. Yet the USA just provides the merest of evidence and the suspects feet doesnt touch the ground!

I'm not so sure about that. A few high profile cases have shown that we don't give people over that easily. Plus I believe the US has deported more people here than the other way round. Not sure on numbers or details though. I imagine many will be Brits living over there who have broken the law and are being kicked out.

Dalelad wrote:

Chill37 wrote: Yet speaking of laws how come it the deportation laws are weighed against us when the USA is involved. From my understanding we , the UK, have to provide a mountain of evidence against a suspect. Yet the USA just provides the merest of evidence and the suspects feet doesnt touch the ground!

I'm not so sure about that. A few high profile cases have shown that we don't give people over that easily. Plus I believe the US has deported more people here than the other way round. Not sure on numbers or details though. I imagine many will be Brits living over there who have broken the law and are being kicked out.

Yes I know which cases you mean. The gentleman who was accused of hacking into the Pentagon for example.

I was referring to the state of play that exists between the UK and the USA when it comes to extradition.

It is weighted in favour of the USA.

[size=12]

Chill37 wrote:Well at least the Lawyers are getting rich.

Chill37: Very rich. Its been reported that Abu Qatada’s human rights lawyers at one firm have been paid over £21 million in legal aid in ten years.

Birnberg Peirce and Partners, fronted by Gareth Peirce, has had an average of £181,000 in taxpayer-funded legal aid a month since 2002, according to Legal Services Commission figures provided under Freedom of Information

Abu Quatada has also been represented by the human rights lawyer Ben Emmerson QC, from Matrix Chambers, where Cherie Blair is a joint founding member.


The extremist has now been fitted with a "GPS satellite" tag and will have to be monitored around the clock, at a cost of £100,000 a week, as part of a massive surveillance operation that is scheduled to cost the public a s t a g g e r i n g £5 million a year. It seems it could be “years” before the case is concluded


Abu Qatada is under a worldwide embargo by the United Nations Security Council Committee.


I came across the above while looking for ' children's rights while in care.' Matrix Chambers also provided the legal advice to Jack Straw MP about making it illegal for any British child to complain about abuse while in State care 2009 !

This odious creature should be sent out of this country as soon as possible. The problem as I see it is that we as a nation pride ourselves on the law protecting us and in the main it does. It is the same law that allows this man to stay. Once you subscribe to the philosophy that laws can be suspended for particular reasons you are on a very slippery slope.
Some will say that it is European law therefore not as applicable in UK. It is still the law. Many people have gained from European law particularly women in terms of equal pay and conditions.
Is a judge a person who is so detached from society that they cannot reflect public opinion. if indeed they should, or is it their job simply to apply the law? If you believe the latter then the right decision was made.
I hope some negotiations can take place that will convince the judges that extraditing this man can be done in a lawful way because that is the only way it will be done.
There are of course some countries where this man would simply have been shot which would have saved a lot of time and trouble. Would you like to live in a country that does that?

Very well said Past it.

Of what crime has he been convicted in the UK?

NONE

Why has he not been tried in UK?

BECAUSE THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONVICT HIM

Why has he not been deported?

BECAUSE WITHOUT TORTURE EVIDENCE, THERE IS NO CASE AGAINST HIM

I don't like his politics or religion, but while we have free speech in this country he should be at liberty to stay.

As soon as we start deporting people to countries with judicial issues because we don't like them all our liberties count for nothing. We are no better than any other totalitarian state.

It seems to be generally accepted that Abu Quatada is a leader of Al Queda, and worked closely with Osama bin Laden. If that is true, why the UK military intelligence people and so on have not been able to accumulate proper evidence against him is a puzzle.

johnb wrote:Of what crime has he been convicted in the UK?

NONE

Why has he not been tried in UK?

BECAUSE THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONVICT HIM

Why has he not been deported?

BECAUSE WITHOUT TORTURE EVIDENCE, THERE IS NO CASE AGAINST HIM

I don't like his politics or religion, but while we have free speech in this country he should be at liberty to stay.

As soon as we start deporting people to countries with judicial issues because we don't like them all our liberties count for nothing. We are no better than any other totalitarian state.

Spot on.

Yes, it would literally be terrible if we started deporting people because we don't like them.


Why is Abu Quatada under a worldwide embargo by the United Nations Security Council Committee??


Perhaps the "intelligence people" and different Home Secretaries involved in his case have knowledge of his radical religious (Salafi) activities-influences and are obliged to make risk assessments in the public's interests ? His support for Islamic suicide bombers, amongst other incidents, have had press coverage...

Well these so called intelligence people have got many things wrong in the past , like when they accused Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction, so I for one will not always trust what they say, similarly with government ministers of all political colours.

Saying that I honestly don't know what he has or has not done, though like extremists of all religions I don't particularly like much of what he has allegedly said.