Britain could be stuck with Abu Qatada for life after judges put the fanatic’s human rights ahead of protecting the public – even though they accepted he was ‘very dangerous’. The judges said that while Qatada’s deportation was ‘long overdue’, his risk to the public was not ‘a relevant consideration’ under human rights laws. The verdict drew a furious response from the Tories and sparked new demands for the Government to ignore the courts and simply throw him out of the country. The UK government launched the appeal after the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) ruled that Abu Qatada should not be deported to Jordan where he was convicted of terror charges in his absence in 1999 . The Appeal Court yesterday upheld an . earlier verdict that sending the hate preacher to face a terror trial in . Jordan would not be fair. Home Secretary Theresa May will now . lodge a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court. If that fails, it would . raise the prospect of Qatada – variously described as a ‘truly dangerous . individual’ and Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe – never . being deported. He could apply to be freed within days. Qatada – described by Mrs May’s legal . team as ‘truly dangerous’ – has now defied the wishes of six Labour and . Tory home secretaries over eight years. Yesterday Justice Secretary Chris . Grayling said: ‘Labour and the Liberal Democrats’ refusal to contemplate . big changes to human rights law is inexplicable given problems like . this. I am bitterly unhappy that we have to wait until the next general . election to sort this out.’ But there was also stinging criticism of the Coalition’s failure to boot Qatada out. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper . said Mrs May’s strategy of pursuing the case through the British courts . rather than in Europe had backfired disastrously, adding: ‘This is an . extremely serious and disappointing judgment.’ Qatada was once described as Osama Bin Laden¿s right-hand man in Europe . and even the judges in the Court of Appeal admit he is regarded as a 'very dangerous' man . Ministers have been trying for a . decade to send Qatada to Jordan, where he is accused of plotting a . terrorist atrocity to coincide with the Millennium. His removal was originally approved . by the British courts, only to be halted by the European Court of Human . Rights last year. Judges in Strasbourg said he would not get a fair . trial because some of the evidence used against him may have been . obtained by torture. Controversially, Mrs May opted not to appeal . against this verdict. Home Secretary Theresa May has branded Qatada a 'dangerous man' but repeatedly failed in her promise to put him on a plane . Instead, she and her ministers . secured personal promises from the Jordanian authorities there would be . no use of torture evidence, and began the deportation process again in . the UK legal system. But last November, the Special . Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) said it was not satisfied with the . assurances, and halted Qatada’s removal. The court said it must reflect . the Strasbourg ruling. That decision was yesterday unanimously upheld by Lord Dyson, the Master of the Rolls, and two other Appeal Court judges. Lord Dyson, sitting with Lord Justice . Richards and Lord Justice Elias, said Qatada was ‘considered to be a . dangerous and controversial person’. He added: ‘It is entirely . understandable that there is a general feeling that his deportation to . Jordan to face trial is long overdue. But the principles that we have to . apply do not distinguish between extremely dangerous persons and others . who may not constitute any danger in the UK and whom the Secretary of . State wishes to deport to face trial in another country. ‘The fact that (Qatada) is considered . to be a dangerous terrorist is not relevant to the issues that are . raised on this appeal.’ Tory MPs have repeatedly urged Mrs May to ignore the courts and throw Qatada out. But that would mean taking the unprecedented step of defying judges in both Europe and Britain. Last night, there was growing unrest among Tories at the failure to get rid of the cleric. Backbencher Dominic Raab said: ‘The . Government made a strategic mistake in the way it argued this case. There is nothing in the European Convention or UK law that says we have . to guarantee fair trials at the other end when we deport foreign . criminals or terrorists. ‘If we had made clear that we . rejected Strasbourg’s ruling – and meddling – on principle at the . outset, the UK Border Agency could have deported Qatada without the UK . courts stopping them.’ Keith Vaz, chairman of the home affairs select committee, said the 'farcical situation' must not be repeated and shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the government's strategy for dealing with Qatada had been 'ripped apart' Qatada is in Belmarsh high-security jail for allegedly breaching his immigration bail conditions. Police are investigating whether he . posted extremist propaganda on the internet while his every move was . supposedly monitored by security officials. Anti-terror police raided . his home after finding fresh jihadi articles on the internet. If charges are brought, it would mean . Qatada standing trial in Britain for the first time, which could itself . halt deportation proceedings. The worst-case scenario for the Home . Office is that police take no further action and Qatada is once again . granted bail. He is shortly due to go before Siac to ask for his . release. The court has granted him bail on two previous occasions. If freed, Qatada would go back under round-the-clock surveillance estimated to cost £100,000 a week, or £5million a year. Qatada sits in a car as he is driven away from a Special Immigration Appeals Hearing at the High Court in London in April last year after being re-arrested . Should the Home Office’s appeal . against yesterday’s verdict be refused, and no charges are brought, . there would no longer be any grounds for holding him in jail or under . effective house arrest. Instead, he would be placed on a . so-called T-Pim - a terror control order that would restrict his . movements and use of the internet, while leaving him free to walk the . streets for up to 12 hours a day. T-Pims normally only last two years, raising the prospect of Qatada being free by mid-2015. The alternative is for Mrs May to try . to get yet more assurances from Jordan and seek permission to restart . the deportation process. Qatada has been linked to a long list of . international terrorists. He featured in hate sermons found on videos in . the flat of one of the September 11 bombers. In April 1999, he was convicted in . his absence on terror charges in Jordan and sentenced to life . imprisonment. It is on these charges that he faces a retrial. Last night, the Home Office said: ‘This is not the end of the road. The Government remains determined to deport Abu Qatada.’ JAMES SLACK'S ANALYSIS . Gamble: Home Secretary Theresa May had hoped assurances from Jordan would be enough to secure Abu Qatada's deportation . For a politician with a reputation built on being a safe pair of hands, Theresa May has shown a surprising appetite for high-stakes gambles in recent months. In the case of Gary McKinnon, she achieved spectacular success. The gamble she took on Abu Qatada, however, now looks like it is going to backfire. In both cases, Mrs May was banking on a favourable diplomatic response from a foreign power – Jordan, in Qatada’s case, and America for Mr McKinnon. A succession of craven Labour home secretaries had been prepared to bundle Asperger’s sufferer Mr McKinnon on to a plane on hacking charges rather than risk upsetting the US. Mrs May courageously stood up to the Americans, saved Mr McKinnon from potential suicide and suffered no meaningful damage to relations with her counterparts in the Obama administration. She has also been prepared to gamble over the future of the UK Border Agency, which she announced was being split in two earlier this week. The organisation is an incompetent shambles and she decided it was beyond saving. Which brings us to the Abu Qatada nightmare. It dates back to this time last year, when the European Court of Human Rights delivered its long-awaited verdict on whether the hate-filled fanatic could be sent to face terror charges in Jordan. The court accepted there would be no risk of Qatada himself being ill-treated (a very important finding). But the judges stopped his removal on the highly contentious grounds that some of the evidence used against him may have been obtained by torture, denying him a fair trial. This argument had already been rejected by Britain’s own Law Lords. So Mrs May had a choice. She could appeal the Strasbourg ruling, which could have led to the court re-examining the case and possibly changing its verdict that Qatada himself faced no danger. Or she could seek reassurances from Jordan no torture evidence would be used in court, and start the deportation all over again in Britain, on this narrow point of law. She went for the second option, staking her credibility on assurances from the Jordanians. It didn’t work. First the Siac immigration court said it wasn’t happy with the undertakings Mrs May had secured and blocked Qatada’s removal. Now that decision has been rubber-stamped by the Appeal Court. Labour – and some Tories – are attacking Mrs May’s strategy and Qatada and his lawyers are laughing at the Government. Mrs May has not given up, and will appeal to the Supreme Court. Doubtless her determination to withdraw Britain from the clutches of the European Court of Human Rights has been strengthened. But, at the moment, it is Qatada holding all the aces in a game Mrs May – and this country – really cannot afford to lose.
Court of Appeal rejects latest attempt by Home Secretary to have Qatada sent back to Jordan .
Released from jail in February last year under strict bail conditions .
Returned to prison this month for breaching rules but may be free in days .
If last-ditch appeal fails he could never be deported from Britain .
Britain could be stuck with Abu Qatada for life after judges put the fanatic’s human rights ahead of protecting the public – even though they accepted he was ‘very dangerous’. The judges said that while Qatada’s deportation was ‘long overdue’, his risk to the public was not ‘a relevant consideration’ under human rights laws. The verdict drew a furious response from the Tories and sparked new demands for the Government to ignore the courts and simply throw him out of the country. The UK government launched the appeal after the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) ruled that Abu Qatada should not be deported to Jordan where he was convicted of terror charges in his absence in 1999 . The Appeal Court yesterday upheld an . earlier verdict that sending the hate preacher to face a terror trial in . Jordan would not be fair. Home Secretary Theresa May will now . lodge a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court. If that fails, it would . raise the prospect of Qatada – variously described as a ‘truly dangerous . individual’ and Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe – never . being deported. He could apply to be freed within days. Qatada – described by Mrs May’s legal . team as ‘truly dangerous’ – has now defied the wishes of six Labour and . Tory home secretaries over eight years. Yesterday Justice Secretary Chris . Grayling said: ‘Labour and the Liberal Democrats’ refusal to contemplate . big changes to human rights law is inexplicable given problems like . this. I am bitterly unhappy that we have to wait until the next general . election to sort this out.’ But there was also stinging criticism of the Coalition’s failure to boot Qatada out. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper . said Mrs May’s strategy of pursuing the case through the British courts . rather than in Europe had backfired disastrously, adding: ‘This is an . extremely serious and disappointing judgment.’ Qatada was once described as Osama Bin Laden¿s right-hand man in Europe . and even the judges in the Court of Appeal admit he is regarded as a 'very dangerous' man . Ministers have been trying for a . decade to send Qatada to Jordan, where he is accused of plotting a . terrorist atrocity to coincide with the Millennium. His removal was originally approved . by the British courts, only to be halted by the European Court of Human . Rights last year. Judges in Strasbourg said he would not get a fair . trial because some of the evidence used against him may have been . obtained by torture. Controversially, Mrs May opted not to appeal . against this verdict. Home Secretary Theresa May has branded Qatada a 'dangerous man' but repeatedly failed in her promise to put him on a plane . Instead, she and her ministers . secured personal promises from the Jordanian authorities there would be . no use of torture evidence, and began the deportation process again in . the UK legal system. But last November, the Special . Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) said it was not satisfied with the . assurances, and halted Qatada’s removal. The court said it must reflect . the Strasbourg ruling. That decision was yesterday unanimously upheld by Lord Dyson, the Master of the Rolls, and two other Appeal Court judges. Lord Dyson, sitting with Lord Justice . Richards and Lord Justice Elias, said Qatada was ‘considered to be a . dangerous and controversial person’. He added: ‘It is entirely . understandable that there is a general feeling that his deportation to . Jordan to face trial is long overdue. But the principles that we have to . apply do not distinguish between extremely dangerous persons and others . who may not constitute any danger in the UK and whom the Secretary of . State wishes to deport to face trial in another country. ‘The fact that (Qatada) is considered . to be a dangerous terrorist is not relevant to the issues that are . raised on this appeal.’ Tory MPs have repeatedly urged Mrs May to ignore the courts and throw Qatada out. But that would mean taking the unprecedented step of defying judges in both Europe and Britain. Last night, there was growing unrest among Tories at the failure to get rid of the cleric. Backbencher Dominic Raab said: ‘The . Government made a strategic mistake in the way it argued this case. There is nothing in the European Convention or UK law that says we have . to guarantee fair trials at the other end when we deport foreign . criminals or terrorists. ‘If we had made clear that we . rejected Strasbourg’s ruling – and meddling – on principle at the . outset, the UK Border Agency could have deported Qatada without the UK . courts stopping them.’ Keith Vaz, chairman of the home affairs select committee, said the 'farcical situation' must not be repeated and shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the government's strategy for dealing with Qatada had been 'ripped apart' Qatada is in Belmarsh high-security jail for allegedly breaching his immigration bail conditions. Police are investigating whether he . posted extremist propaganda on the internet while his every move was . supposedly monitored by security officials. Anti-terror police raided . his home after finding fresh jihadi articles on the internet. If charges are brought, it would mean . Qatada standing trial in Britain for the first time, which could itself . halt deportation proceedings. The worst-case scenario for the Home . Office is that police take no further action and Qatada is once again . granted bail. He is shortly due to go before Siac to ask for his . release. The court has granted him bail on two previous occasions. If freed, Qatada would go back under round-the-clock surveillance estimated to cost £100,000 a week, or £5million a year. Qatada sits in a car as he is driven away from a Special Immigration Appeals Hearing at the High Court in London in April last year after being re-arrested . Should the Home Office’s appeal . against yesterday’s verdict be refused, and no charges are brought, . there would no longer be any grounds for holding him in jail or under . effective house arrest. Instead, he would be placed on a . so-called T-Pim - a terror control order that would restrict his . movements and use of the internet, while leaving him free to walk the . streets for up to 12 hours a day. T-Pims normally only last two years, raising the prospect of Qatada being free by mid-2015. The alternative is for Mrs May to try . to get yet more assurances from Jordan and seek permission to restart . the deportation process. Qatada has been linked to a long list of . international terrorists. He featured in hate sermons found on videos in . the flat of one of the September 11 bombers. In April 1999, he was convicted in . his absence on terror charges in Jordan and sentenced to life . imprisonment. It is on these charges that he faces a retrial. Last night, the Home Office said: ‘This is not the end of the road. The Government remains determined to deport Abu Qatada.’ JAMES SLACK'S ANALYSIS . Gamble: Home Secretary Theresa May had hoped assurances from Jordan would be enough to secure Abu Qatada's deportation . For a politician with a reputation built on being a safe pair of hands, Theresa May has shown a surprising appetite for high-stakes gambles in recent months. In the case of Gary McKinnon, she achieved spectacular success. The gamble she took on Abu Qatada, however, now looks like it is going to backfire. In both cases, Mrs May was banking on a favourable diplomatic response from a foreign power – Jordan, in Qatada’s case, and America for Mr McKinnon. A succession of craven Labour home secretaries had been prepared to bundle Asperger’s sufferer Mr McKinnon on to a plane on hacking charges rather than risk upsetting the US. Mrs May courageously stood up to the Americans, saved Mr McKinnon from potential suicide and suffered no meaningful damage to relations with her counterparts in the Obama administration. She has also been prepared to gamble over the future of the UK Border Agency, which she announced was being split in two earlier this week. The organisation is an incompetent shambles and she decided it was beyond saving. Which brings us to the Abu Qatada nightmare. It dates back to this time last year, when the European Court of Human Rights delivered its long-awaited verdict on whether the hate-filled fanatic could be sent to face terror charges in Jordan. The court accepted there would be no risk of Qatada himself being ill-treated (a very important finding). But the judges stopped his removal on the highly contentious grounds that some of the evidence used against him may have been obtained by torture, denying him a fair trial. This argument had already been rejected by Britain’s own Law Lords. So Mrs May had a choice. She could appeal the Strasbourg ruling, which could have led to the court re-examining the case and possibly changing its verdict that Qatada himself faced no danger. Or she could seek reassurances from Jordan no torture evidence would be used in court, and start the deportation all over again in Britain, on this narrow point of law. She went for the second option, staking her credibility on assurances from the Jordanians. It didn’t work. First the Siac immigration court said it wasn’t happy with the undertakings Mrs May had secured and blocked Qatada’s removal. Now that decision has been rubber-stamped by the Appeal Court. Labour – and some Tories – are attacking Mrs May’s strategy and Qatada and his lawyers are laughing at the Government. Mrs May has not given up, and will appeal to the Supreme Court. Doubtless her determination to withdraw Britain from the clutches of the European Court of Human Rights has been strengthened. But, at the moment, it is Qatada holding all the aces in a game Mrs May – and this country – really cannot afford to lose.
not be deported to Jordan where he was convicted last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court. If that boot Qatada out. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette judges in the Court of Appeal admit he is him may have been . obtained by torture. breaching his immigration bail conditions. Police nightmare. It dates back to this time last year, determination to withdraw Britain from the