Imperial Party forum

thomas davison

Terror suspects linked to ricin plot could use secret courts in bid to go free
By James Slack

Last updated at 1:26 AM on 8th March 2012

Extremist: Fundamentalist Muslim cleric Abu Hamza is an associate of some of the men
Seven Algerian suspected terrorists, including two fanatics linked to a poison murder plot, could be freed on to the streets of Britain after winning a human rights ruling yesterday.

In a blow to the Home Office, they will be allowed to use secret evidence � possibly from a terrorist who claims he has been ill-treated by the Algerians � to claim it would be unsafe to deport them on national security grounds.

The Home Secretary will not be able to check any of the allegations made by the secret witness with the Algerian authorities, or anybody else. In effect, terror suspects will be allowed to rely on secret evidence, given in secret by another terror suspect, to make their case for being allowed to remain in Britain.

If an immigration court rules, based on the secret evidence, that the seven men could face torture in Algeria, they are likely to win their appeals and be freed. They include associates of hate preacher Abu Hamza and Osama Bin Laden, and a pair of extremists arrested over an alleged plot to commit mass murder using the poison ricin in 2003.

The Supreme Court judges who passed the ruling made it clear that they felt deep unease, but said they were opting for the �lesser of two evils�.

The court said the terror suspects� human right to be protected from torture had to take precedence over other considerations.

More...Nuclear-armed terrorists are a real threat to Britain, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg will warn

A Home Office spokesman said: �This judgment is based on a narrow point of legal process and does not change our intention to seek the deportation of these men as soon as possible because they remain a national security risk.�
The complex case comes after the Mail has repeatedly highlighted the dangers of introducing secret justice into inquests and civil court cases.

Proposals backed by Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke could restrict access to a string of hearings on the grounds of national security.

In deportation cases, the Government is already allowed to submit secret intelligence to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) to demonstrate why a terror suspect is considered a threat to national security.

Suspects are represented by a �Specialist Advocate� who is not permitted to tell his client what he is accused of.
However, there are no rules which allow the accused to submit any secret evidence to defend themselves, or show why it would be a breach of the Human Rights Act to kick them out.

The Algerian men claim this is unfair, and appealed to the Supreme Court for permission to call a secret witness. Despite protests from the Home Secretary, the Supreme Court ruled that this should be allowed.

The witness is expected to detail how people sent back to Algeria are at risk of torture.

He or she will, if SIAC agrees, be given total anonymity and a binding promise that his or her evidence will not be communicated to anybody else.

Home Secretary Theresa May will not be at the hearing. She will find out later what the secret evidence is, but will not be allowed to tell the Algerian authorities, or take any steps to establish whether the witness is telling the truth.

The ruling was made by Lord Phillips, president of the Supreme Court, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson and Lord Wilson.

Lord Brown said the �difficulty� and �dilemma� raised by the case faced the court �with what can only be regarded as the most unpalatable of choices�.

Torture fears: The Supreme Court judges who passed the ruling made it clear that they felt deep unease, but said they were opting for the 'lesser of two evils'
He said: �It is lesser evils which the court is searching for here, not perfect solutions.�

The Algerians, who cannot be named for legal reasons, claimed that they would be at risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

SIAC, which had previously ruled they could be deported, will now have to consider all their cases again. In their cases, they will rely on a secret witness who will say that despite the Government having assurances from Algeria that they will not be tortured, they are highly likely to face ill-treatment.

If SIAC believes the witness, all seven could be freed. They are currently in jail pending deportation.

The ringleader of the ricin conspiracy, Kamel Bourgass, murdered Detective Constable Stephen Oake during a 2003 police raid in Manchester. He is not involved in this case.

REALLY!!! "The court said the terror suspects� human right to be protected from torture had to take precedence over other considerations." - Well what about our HUMAN RIGHT to walk OUR streets free of the fear of these animals hatching another terror plot against OUR country! The UK courts are a disgrace and the judges need replacing with people with common sense! These animals are a threat to our nation and their well being should be bottom of the list when considered against the safety of UK population. If our non-exisitant immigration polcies hadn't had let them in, in the first place, we wouldn't have this situation - Thanks Labour!! I'll have to have a 'Secret Witness' if I ever appear in court!

WHEN INJUSTICE BECOMES LAW RESISTANCE BECOMES YOUR DUTY

2Anne · Joined: 04 May 2008 Posts: 399 Location: Norfolk

Why should the rights of terrorists be a consideration in deporting them?
If they get tortured good!! Just what they deserve.
This reason is why thousands of so called refugees and asylum seekers manage to stay in the UK.
We simply do not want this trash settling here and bringing their evil ways and horrible families with them. All living off welfare of course.