What would happen if Cameron decided to ignore the ECHR, and just shipped him back to Jordan, on the next available flight with a free jump suit and blacked out goggles?
I ask simply to understand better exactly what the consequences of ignoring the ECHR are.
It is my understanding that our courts are not bound to accept decisions of the ECHR, but must only consider them. Whereas the government are bound to follow the decisions, but beyond that I don't really know much about this.
|
Its a sad day when our government can't say who can and can't come here or stay here.
Some of our politicians should be charged with treason, that would concentrate a few minds.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 7 Feb 12 at 16:16
|
Oh good heavens how boring. This was all on Newsnight last night.
BEAVER!
|
>> BEAVER!
>>
I prefer the American meaning.
|
>> I prefer the American meaning.
That goes without saying ON. You are a former member of the licentious soldiery. But who can take seriously the preferences of someone whose solution to the presence in this country of a seriously malevolent beardie is to suggest that our own great and good be charged with treason?
Tchah!
|
>> >> BEAVER!
>> >>
>>
>> I prefer the American meaning.
>>
Is that the synonym for "muff"?
|
>> Oh good heavens how boring. This was all on Newsnight last night.
Some of us have more interesting things to do in the evening than watch Newsnight, but I suppose that is all behind you AC.
Still, I'll see if I can catch it on iPlayer.
|
|
Today's activities imply that the sad day has arrived! BTW - what happened to the inflammatory chap with hooks instead of hands? A similar sort of case ISTR.
|
>> What would happen if Cameron decided to ignore the ECHR, and just shipped him back to Jordan
He can't. It can only be done by someone who has few backbones.
If I were PM, I would have kicked him out of UK and put him in a cage in Brussels. Problem solved.
|
|
hand him over the yanks, they must have some trumped up charges.
|
Let's be practical here. We don't own any cages in Brussels. Those belong to the Belgians.
Qatada could be extradited to Jordan today, and should be. There would be no dire effects. Most foreigners hate and distrust us already. That wouldn't change.
|
Why would anyone want to ignore the ECHR. This mans rights matter. The public's opinion doesnt.
Public heckling will prevent a man getting his contractual renumeration, but unlikely to be heard if the man would like you to be dead, or worse. Funny old world.
|
>> This mans rights matter. The public's opinion doesnt.
You are perhaps being sarcastic here, but what you say is true: people's rights do matter, and public opinion, often very misguided, doesn't.
However, Beaverman doesn't actually have a right to be here. He's an illegal immigrant who got in on a forged passport and he is wanted on criminal charges in Jordan.
So unless he's working for us as a lightning conductor (the ether must be very full of strange waves when he's giving lectures to alienated toerags who think they are Muslims, and there must be a lot of nondescript vans and cars parked around his house a lot of the time with 'courting couples' in them) he can and should be sent away.
If only for that ghastly beard.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Tue 7 Feb 12 at 17:08
|
Who me, sarcastic, never :-)
The right to remain isnt the point with Abu though is it, its the right to be safe from iffy justice and from what I recall when the ruling was made and it was in the news, basically the ECHR doesnt trust this and on the face of it, I dont blame them.
However, I think that sometimes to hell with it, he decided to rock up here and start being unpleasent, let him take his chances back home, he dont like this country, happy to help him leave.
Rights in this country are rather inconsistant though - keep reading stories of people finding illegals etc who have moved into their homes while they are out and somehow the owners have so little right to turf them out. Seems to me rights on something as sacred as ones home need a heck of a lot of rethinking. Its absurd.
|
>> You are perhaps being sarcastic here, but what you say is true: people's rights do
>> matter, and public opinion, often very misguided, doesn't.
>>
>> However, Beaverman doesn't actually have a right to be here. He's an illegal immigrant who
>> got in on a forged passport and he is wanted on criminal charges in Jordan.
It's more fundamental than that.
It may be that he does technically have a right to not be deported, but the needs of national security have to trump that.
The mistake that is often made is to suggest that the legal due process is always applicable, or appropriate, in every situation.
This is clearly a fiction.
To use a very extreme example, if you are about to be invaded, you don't apply to the court for a restraining order against the enemy.
Even Bush understood this, when he set up that Cuban retreat.
|
So, I had a look at Newsnight, and the answer seems to be that other countries have ignored the ECHR before, and all you get is a strongly worded condemnation from them.
In that case, Cameron needs to grow a pair and get that guy on a plane.
It'll stand him in good stead in the next election.
|
Abu Qatada - Old Navy
