One in one out for radical Muslim preachers

5 November 2010 by

In

 

Updated | Today the UK courts have made two decisions in relation to radical Muslim clerics. The score card reads: Abu Hamza can keep his passport and stay (for now), but Dr Zakir Naik, an Indian preacher who was excluded from the UK by the Home Secretary in June, will remain unwelcome.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission has ruled that Abu Hamza can keep his UK passport as if a deprivation order were made, he would be made stateless, as he claimed he had already been stripped of his Egyptian citizenship. By section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981, the Secretary of State cannot make a person stateless. The UK is trying to deport him altogether, but his claim is being heard at the European Court of Human Rights (see our post).

Meanwhile, the High Court has ruled that the exclusion of Dr Zakir Naik, an Indian television preacher and president of the Islamic Research Foundation, was lawful and was a proportionate interference with freedom of expression rights. He was blocked by the Home Secretary from giving a lecture in June as a result of his alleged support for Islamist terrorism, Osama Bin Ladin as well as his comment that Jews are the “staunchest enemy” of Islam. He denies that he supports terrorism.

The High Court rejected his challenge to the exclusion on legitimate expectation, procedural fairness and freedom of expression grounds. The substance of the decision can be found from paragraph 60 onwards. The judgment is wide-ranging and interesting. In respect of the Article 10 argument, the judge held that Dr Naik was himself excluded from protections under the Human Rights Act for territorial reasons, but that his supporters, who would have come to hear him speak, were not (para 79). His supporters’ rights to receive information, a lesser spotted aspect of Article 10, was engaged. The interference with that right was, however, justified. Mr Justice Cranston concluded:

89. In my judgment Dr Naik was not accorded the procedural fairness to which he was entitled prior to the Secretary of State’s decision on 16 June. The decision letter of 17 June reflects that, in that it focuses on the application of the unacceptable behaviours policy to four statements, only one of which was plainly before Dr Naik so that he could address the concern surrounding it and point out, for example, that it pre-dated the events of 9/11. By the time of the further decision of 9 August, however, Dr Naik had had a substantial opportunity to make representations about the basis on which the Secretary of State affirmed his exclusion. That 9 August decision thus survives the procedural fairness challenge. In my view it also survives the other challenges advanced against it, for the reasons I have explained. Dr Naik could not have had a substantive legitimate expectation that he would be permitted to continue to visit this country, and any interference with the article 10 rights of Dr Naik and his potential audience is lawful and proportionate. The result is that the Secretary of State’s exclusion of Dr Naik from the United Kingdom is lawful.

We will cover both cases in more detail next week.

Update, 9 November 2010: The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz has published an interesting comparison of different international approaches to revocation of citizenship. A new law proposed in Israel will allow for people to be made ‘stateless’, which is not permitted in Europe and indeed is why Abu Hamza’s passport could not be revoked.

Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS

Read more

16 comments


  1. Mohammud says:

    Bro, I don’t follow Muaweeya, neither I think does the majority of muslim. I follow our Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. In fact i did not know this chap Muaweeya until you mention him.

    We respect Hazrat Ali, however at the end of the day, our Prophet Muhammad s.a.w is more important than Ali.

    The Shia community has given Hazrat Ali so much importance to the point where they’ve elevated him to the same rank as our Prophet Muhammad s.a.w if not higher.

    I’m a muslim and I follow the guidance of our Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. I follow the Quran and the Hadith.

    I think that applies to the majority of muslims and inc Dr Zakir Naik.

    1. Manzoor Jaffery says:

      Brother

      This is my point that you, majority Muslims and Zakir ignorantly follow Muaweeya without knowing it.
      AT LEAST INVESTIGATE.

      In your first posting you called Muaweeya follower of Muhammad and now you are distancing from him.
      Make up your mind.

      Shia did not raise the status of Ali. Muhammad himself raised it and it is written in your Sahih books. By ignorance you do not know it.

      After completing his last pilgrimage (Hajjatul-Wada’), Prophet [s] was leaving Makkah toward Madinah, where he and the crowd of people reached a place called Ghadir Khumm (which is close to today’s al-Juhfah). It was a place where people from different provinces used to greet each other before taking different routes for their homes.

      In this place, the following verse of the Qur’an was revealed:

      “O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people …” (Qur’an 5:67)

      The last sentence in the above verse indicates that the Prophet [s] was mindful of the reaction of his people in delivering that message but Allah informs him not to worry, for He will protect His Messenger from people.

      Then followed the key sentence denoting the clear designation of ‘Ali as the leader of the Muslim ummah. The Prophet [s] held up the hand of ‘Ali and said:

      “For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), ‘Ali is his Leader (mawla).”

      Immediately after the Prophet [s] finished his speech, the following verse of the Qur’an was revealed:

      “Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)

      The above verse clearly indicates that Islam without clearing up matter of leadership after Prophet [s] was not complete, and completion of religion was due to announcement of the Prophet’s immediate successor.

      Numerous Sunni ref
      INVESTIGATE

  2. akhand says:

    i think UK govt. is scared seeing countinious growth of Muslims! Dr. zakir naik was clearly qouted out of context ! How dumb tht UK judge is ! even a 3year old can say he was anti -terror.

    1. Omer says:

      I’m with you on that Bro!

  3. Mohammud says:

    I got it – you are from the Shia community. Following of Muhammad is Islam not following of Ali.
    Muaweeya is a follower of Muhammad therefore his followings would be that of Islam.

    1. Omer says:

      Nice 1 Bro. Educative answer indeed!

    2. Manzoor Jaffery says:

      How ignorant you can be about Islam
      Let me quote you your books

      There are many hadith making it imperative on the umma to follow Ali. One of them is narrated by Ammar-e-Yasir, which your following ulema have recorded in their books: Hafiz Abi Nu’aim Ispahani in Hilya; Muhammad Bin Talha Shafi’i in Matalibu’s-Su’ul; Baladhuri in Ta’rikh; Sheikh Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in Yanabiu’l-Mawadda, Chapter 43, from Hamwaini; Mir Seyyed Ali Hamadani Shafi’i in Mawaddatu’l-Qurba, Mawadda V; Dailami in Firdaus. They narrate a lengthy, detailed hadith which cannot be related here in full. It may be stated briefly that when people asked Abu Ayyub why he had gone to Ali and had not sworn allegiance to Abu Bakr, he replied that one day he was sitting with the Prophet when Ammar-e-Yasir came in and asked the Prophet a question. In the course of his conversation, the Prophet said: “O Ammar! If all the people go one way and Ali alone goes the other way, you should follow Ali. O Ammar! Ali will not allow you to diverge from the path of guidance and will not lead you to destruction; O Ammar! obedience to Ali is obedience to me, and obedience to me is obedience to Allah.” In light of these injunctions, and in light of Ali’s opposition to Abu Bakr, shouldn’t people have followed Ali? Even if the Bani Hashim, Bani Umayya, distinguished companions, the intelligentsia of the nation, the Muhajirs, and Ansars had not been with him (and they were with him), people should have followed Ali.

      SHOW ME ONE HADITH THAT FOLLOWING OF MUAWEEYA IS ISLAM
      MUAWEEYA FOUGHT WITH ALI
      ACCORDING TO YOUR SAHIH BOOKS HAQ(TRUTH) IS WITH ALI
      MUAWEEYA FOUGHT AGAINST HAQ (TRUTH)
      Read character of Muaweeya from your books.

  4. Mohammud says:

    Would the Devouted Muslim Chap be a bit more elaborate. Hw gave us a history lesson however i can’t see how it relate to how Dr Zakir Naik is. Some facts to prove your statements will be welcome.

    As far as I can see, Dr Naik’s exclusion is a political statement from the new govenment. He does not stand a chance of fighting the British govenment in their own back garden.

    According to Theresa May, it’s a priviledge to be in UK – would like her to tell us what that priviledge is?

    ALso, Dr Naik has been in UK countless time before – I can’t see any adverse effect from those visits.

    His views are easily available on Internet and TV anyway. What are they going to do about that?

    1. Manzoor Jaffery says:

      It relates very much to all so called Muslims including Zakir Naik. Zakir and you are followers of Muaweeya not MUHAMMAD

      Following of Muhammad is ISLAM

      Following of Muaweeya is NOT ISLAM

  5. RESS says:

    RACIAL CITIZENSHIP CONFERENCE 2012

    While the Racial Citizenship Conference 2012 is being planned please feel free to get familiar with the new and improved colour coded approved and extended

    “RACE CODES”.

    http://raceequalitysecretservice.blogspot.com/2010/11/racial-citizenship-conference-2012.html

  6. Andy Cooke says:

    I would question the state of the British Judiciary over the last few years in making such ridiculous decisions on harbouring potential terrorists in the UK. Law Lords are far too out of touch with reality and indeed put the security of the British people at risk and indeed waste taxpayers money by accomadating them in British jails.

  7. Manzoor Jaffery says:

    I am a devoted Muslim. For me both Abu Hamza and Zakir Naik are EVIL and they should be treated like that.
    BOTH ARE IGNORANT OF ISLAM. BOTH DO NOT KNOW QURAN.

    1. Omer says:

      If they are BOTH ignorant of Islam and BOTH do not know the Qur’an, then why is the Government picking on them! Since you are a “devoted Muslim”, you must know that the same happened to the prophet at his time. was he EVIL too!

      Tell me Brother “Devoted Muslim”, is calling people to Allah, their creator, EVIL! And the level of professionalism Dr. Zakir Naik has in calling to that way and the amount of people listening and changing their lives thereafter is proof enough that he is NOT IGNORANT OF ISLAM.

      The one who is out there defending the Qur’an while you sleep tight, most definitely KNOWS the Qur’an MORE than you.

      What will you say to Allah That Day, when he asks you what role you had to play in preventing my message from spreading into the world?

      Dear Brother, please think again. Let’s UNITE as Muslims brother. They’ll take us down one by one and eventually come for us ourselves, and then we won’t have any helpers because we helped them ourselves to destroy those who could come for our help when we need them the most.

      I hope you understand my Brother.

      You can email me on: umrism@hotmail.co.uk

      1. Manzoor Jaffery says:

        Brother- Is this your argument? That a corrupt Government is after them? I compare Zakir Naik to Iblees. Iblees has more knowledge of Islam than Zakir.
        Zakir does not know ABC of Islam. He and you and most of the rest of so called scholars do not know who changed them to Ahle-Sunnah wal Jamait instead of Muslims. Let me give you a history lesson. After the death of Umer, a small selected council of Muslims were to appoint new Khalifa. on the condition that new Khalifa has to follow the sunnah of previous Khalifa. Ali rejected that condition and Usman accepted that condition and Usman was appointed the Khalifa.
        When Usman was killed, Muaweeya (I still could not find the date of his conversion to Islam-but false Hadiths about his being a Sahabi and scriber of Quran) had to rally people against Khalifa Ali. So he told his followers that Ali does not follow the sunnah of Abubaker and Umer while he does. He named his followers Ahle-Sunnah. Muaweeya fought against Ali and then by fraud he made a pact with Ali. At that point he added the words wal Jamait.
        You, he and majority of Muslims follow the sunnah of Muaweeya NOT MUHAMMAD. Since then so called Muslim governments adopted the sunnah of Muaweeya because it was protecting their rule.
        So you, he and most Muslims are followers of Muaweeya NOT Muhammad.
        Ahle-Sunnah Wal Jamait

    2. Omer says:

      Firstly, it’s a shame that you did not reply, and you simply COULD not reply, to even one comment that I made.

      Secondly, I never said I am from Ahl-e-sunnah Wal jamaa’ah! And if you lectured on this because of Dr.Zakir Naik then I’d like to inform you that there is a video of Dr. Zakir Naik in which he tells the Muslims to call themselves MUSLIMS ONLY! No OTHER! And not to be divided! Want Proof? Here is the Link: http://www.youtube.com/user/Umrism?feature=mhum#p/c/F5C909A000A21332/0/-exUaeDB858

      You said Iblees has MORE knowledge of Islam than Dr. Zakir! Seems to me you are a close friend of Iblees to know that much about him! Since he knows Islam more than Dr. Zakir and you too are a “devoted Muslim”, It sounds to me that you are studying Islam under Iblees himself. And even if Iblees has more knowledge than Dr. Zakir it doesn’t benefit him because he doesn’t follow it or spread it, which are two things Dr. Zakir Naik has devoted his life to.

      And brother! Why are you telling me History! I didn’t even say anything about that! The fact that you didn’t answer a single of my comments and started telling me things from here and there shows that you INDEED are getting your education from “Molana Iblees”.

      Peace.

  8. Michael Hill says:

    This man foments racial hatred & terrorism. If he has been stripped of Egyptian citizenship, then let him be stripped of British.
    Hitler had the same ideals, Lord Haw haw hung for it, why tolerate the likes of this one?

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the UKHRB


This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe

Categories


Tags


7/7 Bombings 9/11 A1P1 Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 article 263 TFEU Artificial Intelligence Asbestos Assange assisted suicide asylum asylum seekers Australia autism badgers benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology birds directive blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity circumcision citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Cologne Commission on a Bill of Rights common buzzard common law communications competition confidentiality confiscation order conscientious objection consent conservation constitution contact order contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus costs costs budgets Court of Protection crime criminal law Criminal Legal Aid criminal records Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty declaration of incompatibility defamation DEFRA Democracy village deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention devolution Dignitas dignity Dignity in Dying diplomacy director of public prosecutions disability Disability-related harassment disciplinary hearing disclosure Discrimination Discrimination law disease divorce DNA doctors does it matter? domestic violence Dominic Grieve don't ask don't ask don't tell don't tell Doogan and Wood double conviction DPP guidelines drones duty of care ECHR economic and social rights economic loss ECtHR Education election Employment Environment environmental information Equality Act Equality Act 2010 ethics Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights European Court of Justice european disability forum European Sanctions Blog Eurozone euthanasia evidence Exclusion extra-jurisdictional reach of ECHR extra-territoriality extradition extradition act extradition procedures extradition review extraordinary rendition Facebook Facebook contempt facial recognition fair procedures Fair Trial faith courts fake news Family family courts family law family legal aid Family life fatal accidents act Fertility fertility treatment FGM fisheries fishing rights foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Association Freedom of Expression freedom of information Freedom of Information Act 2000 freedom of movement freedom of speech free speech game birds gangbo gang injunctions Garry Mann gary dobson Gary McFarlane gay discrimination Gay marriage gay rights gay soldiers Gaza Gaza conflict Gender General Dental Council General Election General Medical Council genetic discrimination genetic engineering genetic information genetics genetic testing Google government Grenfell grooming Gun Control gwyneth paltrow gypsies habitats habitats protection Halsbury's Law Exchange hammerton v uk happy new year harassment Hardeep Singh Haringey Council Harkins and Edwards Health healthcare health insurance Heathrow heist heightened scrutiny Henry VII Henry VIII herd immunity hereditary disorder High Court of Justiciary Hirst v UK HIV HJ Iran HM (Iraq) v The Secretary of state for the home department [2010] EWCA Civ 1322 Holder holkham beach holocaust homelessness Home Office Home Office v Tariq homeopathy hooding Hounslow v Powell House of Commons Housing housing benefits Howard League for Penal Reform how judges decide cases hra damages claim Hrant Dink HRLA HS2 hs2 challenge hts http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2011/04/11/us-state-department-reports-on-uk-human-rights/ Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority human genome human rights Human Rights Act Human Rights Act 1998 human rights advocacy Human rights and the UK constitution human rights commission human rights conventions human rights damages Human Rights Day human rights decisions Human Rights Information Project human rights news Human Rights Watch human right to education human trafficking hunting Huntington's Disease HXA hyper injunctions Igor Sutyagin illegality defence immigration Immigration/Extradition Immigration Act 2014 immigration appeals immigration detention immigration judge immigration rules immunity increase of sanction India Indonesia Infrastructure Planning Committee inherent jurisdiction inherited disease Inhuman and degrading treatment injunction Inquest Inquests insult insurance insurmountable obstacles intelligence services act intercept evidence interception interests of the child interim remedies international international conflict international criminal court international humanitarian law international human rights international human rights law international law international treaty obligations internet internet service providers internment internship inuit investigation investigative duty in vitro fertilisation Iran iranian bank sanctions Iranian nuclear program Iraq Iraqi asylum seeker Iraq War Ireland irrationality islam Israel Italy iTunes IVF ivory ban jackson reforms Janowiec and Others v Russia ( Japan Jason Smith Jeet Singh Jefferies Jeremy Corbyn jeremy hunt job Jogee John Hemming John Terry joint enterprise joint tenancy Jon Guant Joseph v Spiller journalism judaism judges Judges and Juries judging Judicial activism judicial brevity judicial deference judicial review Judicial Review reform judiciary Julian Assange jurisdiction jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Act Justice and Security Bill Justice and Security Green Paper Justice Human Rights Awards JUSTICE Human Rights Awards 2010 just satisfaction Katyn Massacre Kay v Lambeth Kay v UK Ken Clarke Ken Pease Kerry McCarthy Kettling Kings College Klimas koran burning Labour Lady Hale lansley NHS reforms LASPO Law Commission Law Pod UK Law Society Law Society of Scotland leave to enter leave to remain legal aid legal aid cuts Legal Aid desert Legal Aid Reforms legal blogs Legal Certainty legal naughty step Legal Ombudsman legal representation legitimate expectation let as a dwelling Leveson Inquiry Levi Bellfield lewisham hospital closure lgbtq liability Libel libel reform Liberal Democrat Conference Liberty libraries closure library closures Libya licence conditions licence to shoot life insurance life sentence life support limestone pavements limitation lisbon treaty Lithuania Litigation litvinenko live exports local authorities locked in syndrome london borough of merton London Legal Walk London Probation Trust Lord Bingham Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Blair Lord Goldsmith lord irvine Lord Judge speech Lord Kerr Lord Lester Lord Neuberger Lord Phillips Lord Rodger Lord Sumption Lord Taylor LSC tender luftur rahman machine learning MAGA Magna Carta mail on sunday Majority Verdict Malcolm Kennedy malice Margaret Thatcher Margin of Appreciation margin of discretion Maria Gallastegui marriage material support maternity pay Matthew Woods Mattu v The University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust [2011] EWHC 2068 (QB) Maya the Cat Mba v London Borough Of Merton McKenzie friend Media and Censorship Medical medical liability medical negligence medical qualifications medical records medicine mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Capacity Act 2005 Mental Health mental health act mental health advocacy mental health awareness Mental Health Courts Mental illness merits review MGN v UK michael gove Midwives migrant crisis Milly Dowler Ministerial Code Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice cuts misfeasance in public office modern slavery morality morocco mortuaries motherhood Motor Neurone disease Moulton Mousa MP expenses Mr Gul Mr Justice Eady MS (Palestinian Territories) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department murder murder reform Musician's Union Muslim NADA v. SWITZERLAND - 10593/08 - HEJUD [2012] ECHR 1691 naked rambler Naomi Campbell nationality National Pro Bono Week national security Natural England nature conservation naturism Nazi negligence Neuberger neuroscience Newcastle university news News of the World new Supreme Court President NHS NHS Risk Register Nick Clegg Nicklinson Niqaab Noise Regulations 2005 Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance nursing nursing home Obituary Occupy London offensive jokes Offensive Speech offensive t shirt oil spill olympics open justice oppress OPQ v BJM orchestra Osama Bin Laden Oxford University paramountcy principle parental rights parenthood parking spaces parliamentary expenses parliamentary expenses scandal Parliamentary sovereignty Parliament square parole board passive smoking pastor Terry Jones patents Pathway Students Patrick Quinn murder Pensions persecution personal data Personal Injury personality rights perversity Peter and Hazelmary Bull PF and EF v UK Phil Woolas phone hacking phone taps physical and mental disabilities physician assisted death Pinnock Piracy Plagiarism planning planning human rights planning system plebgate POCA podcast points Poland Police police investigations police liability police misconduct police powers police surveillance Policy Exchange report political judges Politics Politics/Public Order poor reporting Pope Pope's visit Pope Benedict portal possession proceedings power of attorney PoW letters to ministers pre-nup pre-nuptial Pre-trial detention predator control pregnancy press press briefing press freedom Prince Charles prince of wales princess caroline of monaco principle of subsidiarity prior restraint prison Prisoners prisoners rights prisoners voting prisoner vote prisoner votes prisoner voting prison numbers Prisons prison vote privacy privacy injunction privacy law through the front door Private life private nuisance private use proceeds of crime Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecution Protection of Freedoms Act Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest protest camp protest rights Protocol 15 psychiatric hospitals Public/Private public access publication public authorities Public Bodies Bill public inquiries public interest public interest environmental litigation public interest immunity Public Order Public Sector Equality Duty putting the past behind quango quantum quarantine Queen's Speech queer in the 21st century R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 R (on the application of) v The General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 2839 (Admin) R (on the application of EH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 2569 (Admin) R (on the application of G) v The Governors of X School Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2 race relations Rachel Corrie Radmacher Raed Salah Mahajna Raed Saleh Ramsgate raptors rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion resuscitation RightsInfo right to die right to family life right to life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials security services sexual offence Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa south african constitution Spain special advocates spending cuts Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance swine flu Syria Tax Taxi technology Terrorism terrorism act tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine unfair consultation universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vaccination vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wildlife wind farms WomenInLaw Worboys wrongful birth YearInReview Zimbabwe

Disclaimer


This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.

%d bloggers like this: