The Times on Abu Qatada

8 July 2013 by

Muslim cleric Abu Qatada prepares to board a small aircraft bound for JordaI have an opinion piece in today’s Times on Abu Qatada. It is behind a paywall so I can’t reproduce it here, but you can probably guess from the title what my theme is: Abu Qatada’s case shows the human rights system worksEnjoy (if you have access).

Here is a taster:

Theresa May, the Home Secretary has warned that “nothing should be off the table in terms of … how we deal with the European Court”. But she also told the 2011 Tory conference about an “illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because — and I am not making this up — he had pet a cat”.

That story, like many others about human rights law, was made up. It is unsurprising that ministers are often scathing about human rights law — it makes their lives more difficult — but the alternative is all-powerful ministers making decisions with impunity.

As usual, I couldn’t resist a Catgate reference.

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

Related posts:

5 comments


  1. Mactheknife says:

    Appeal after appeal after appeal after appeal. The law needs major reform to enable us to remove those who have been instructed to leave. If the only way to stop people abusing the process by appealing against everything time and again is to withdraw and put our own law back in place then so be it.

    Today we have the European court meddling again in the sentencing of prisoners in the UK . Once again there will be a public outcry and a stronger desire to get out of ECHR and it provides politicians with the ammunition they need.

    The sooner we can bring the human rights legal gravy train to a halt the better.

  2. jon meldrum says:

    I would be interested to know exactly *which* ECHR judgments Theresa May thinks “crazy”, what in them and why. Because as far as I am concerned neither she nor anyone else taking her stance has to date explained.

  3. Theo Hopkins says:

    It was not a victory for the UK government(s) or Mrs May.
    It is a victory for human rights.

  4. Couldn’t resist a catgate reference? Neither could the Telegraph… although they seemed to think it was a legitimate example *bangs head on table*

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10163556/Abu-Qatadas-exit-is-a-triumph-for-Mrs-May.html

  5. Mike says:

    Grayling says that the Tories’ next election manifesto shall include plans to withdraw wholesale from human rights laws. That makes me
    feel very uneasy.
    Just look at the man’s record to date, where thousands are denied justice because they cannot pay for it.
    I shudder to think what this country will look like, if he and the rest of his right-wing cronies get another five years in office.

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


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 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 citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Commission on a Bill of Rights common law communications competition confidentiality consent conservation constitution contact order contact tracing contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus coronavirus act 2020 costs costs budgets Court of Protection covid crime criminal law Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation DEFRA deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention Dignitas diplomacy disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 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 evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Facebook Facial Recognition Family Fatal Accidents Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage gay rights Gaza Gender genetics Germany Google Grenfell Gun Control Health HIV home office Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Human Rights Watch Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests insurance international law internet inuit Iran Iraq Ireland islam Israel Italy IVF ivory ban Japan joint enterprise judaism judicial review Judicial Review reform Julian Assange jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid legal aid cuts Leveson Inquiry lgbtq liability Libel Liberty Libya lisbon treaty Lithuania local authorities marriage Media and Censorship mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery morocco murder music Muslim nationality national security naturism neuroscience NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance Obituary parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury physician assisted death Piracy Plagiarism planning planning system Poland Police Politics Pope press prison Prisoners prisoner votes Prisons privacy Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecutions Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries quarantine Radicalisation rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania round-up Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials sexual offence shamima begum Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance sweatshops Syria Tax technology Terrorism tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal credit universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court 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: