header-logo header-logo

27 September 2012
Issue: 7531 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Abu Hamza shown red card

Request for case to be re-opened rejected by Grand Chamber Panel

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has given the final all-clear to the extradition to the US of Abu Hamza, Babar Ahmad and three other terrorism suspects.

The five had appealed a unanimous ruling by the Court in April that their potential imprisonment in a US “supermax” prison would amount to “inhuman and degrading treatment” under Art 3 of the European Convention, in Babar Ahmad & Ors v UK (App Nos 24027/07, 11949/08, 36742/08, 66911/09 and 67354/09).

Their extradition was put on hold until the appeal was heard.

This week, however, the Grand Chamber Panel decided to reject the five men’s request that the case be re-opened. This means the Court’s judgment in April is final.

Roger Smith, director of human rights group Justice, said: “It’s the correct decision.

“It’s a good example of how the European Convention protects the outer posts of the constitution and leaves a whole range of decisions up to politicians and decision-makers.

“Some people might think Abu Hamza and Baber Ahmad should not be sent to the US because of the disproportionality of the sentences they might receive, but that’s a political argument – it’s not a human rights or a constitutional argument. So too, is the agreement with the US over extradition, which Justice has opposed.

“Abu Hamza generally gets no sympathy, but the Baber Ahmad case is more ambiguous and does attract sympathy, and we have the extradition case of [Pentagon hacker] Gary McKinnon to come. I think Ahmad should be charged and prosecuted in the UK.”

Smith said European Court of Human Rights cases such as this could be speeded up if the Court was given more funds.

“It is short of funding and has a massive backlog of about 100,000 cases. This means cases can go into a black hole.”

Hamza faces charges on 11 different counts in the US, related to the taking of 16 hostages in Yemen in 1998, advocating violent jihad in Afghanistan in 2001 and conspiring to establish a jihad training camp in Oregon, US between June 2000 and December 2001.

Ahmad, an IT specialist who allegedly promoted terrorism through a website, has been held without trial for eight years.

 

Issue: 7531 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll