Here she goes again



[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22275000Part VI - Return of the Jedi[/url



I'm not certain how guaranteeing him a fair trial on the basis of some rapidly drawn up agreement gets round the fact that some of the evidence that would be used against him was obtained in the past, allegedly by using torture (which is my understanding of why it has fallen down previously). Are the Jordanians saying that they'll forget all about that and obtain new evidence for a new trial? Are they that keen to get him back?



Qatada is an out and out scumbag, but as many have pointed out, we have to abide by the rule of law and if he can't be deported lawfully, he can't be deported.



I was half hoping that the UK would temporarily withdraw from the ECHR to achieve their aim, which, while it smacks of an utterly desperate government, would at least have given me the opportunity to abuse the human rights of some coalition politicians with virtual impunity.

A temporary withdrawal from the ECHR would be ludicrous and more particularly a dangerous precedent.

It was being suggested in various media beforehand and apparently mentioned in the House.



And I agree with you.

Good idea, stick a nice Geranium and a Begonia in amongst them while they are distracted burning effigies of May

So you think the government should be able to pick and choose which court rulings they abide by?

The first duty of a government is to protect it's citizens from harm (or should be), it seems the first duty of the courts is to protect the scum want to cause the harm. I bet you will find a lot of muslims want shut of him just as much as anyone, but the courts just seem to go against anything governments try to do and certainly seem to go against public opinion (even when it's the right thing to do).



I don't have a problem with putting this piece of scum on a plane.

There should be a common sense clause in laws like this. We're giving him a living and in return he preaches hate against us on our own streets?



I'd just stick him on the plane and wish the Jordanians all the best, he's their citizen, they should take responsibility for him.

Ah, the Court of Public Opinion should hold preference? The same Court of Public Opinon that would have seen countless ultimately proven-innocent people executed?



Stick your "Public Opinion" up your ar[is[/ie

Please phrase "common sense"in a legal way, so that laws can be recognised and adhered to

This is a war and in times of war there is no requirement to go through the courts. Qatada and all of his ideological cohorts who have declared war on this country should immediately be stopped. You cannot win a war when your primary concerns are the human rights of those trying to destroy you.

Actually, even though you are a spoof account, thats where you are wrong.

The duty of the courts is to interpret and apply the law. If the government is allowed to ignore their rulings when the result doesn't favour them, it doesn't take a genius to work out where that would lead.



The judiciary is independent for a very good reason, and whilst this may lead to undesirable outcomes from time to time, the alternatives are much, much less desirable.

What the hell does that even mean?



1.2 (a) (iii) This statute shall apply in England and Wales, unless the Daily Mail says otherwise.

The first duty of the courts is to interpret and apply the law regardless of politics.

If you start making exceptions according to public opinion etc, you are in effect introducing mob rule which damages the whole point of the law in the first place.