header-logo header-logo

15 November 2012
Issue: 7538 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Qatada deportation setback

SIAC ruling on Muslim cleric angers government

Muslim cleric Abu Qatada has been freed on bail following a tribunal ruling that he might not get a fair trial if deported to Jordan to face terrorism charges.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) decision this week follows a European Court of Human Rights ruling in January that the cleric would not face ill-treatment if returned to Jordan but may not get a fair trial, as a Jordanian court could use evidence obtained by torture.

Delivering his judgment, Mr Justice Mitting said the secretary of state had not satisfied the tribunal that there was “no real risk” that “impugned statements” would be used against Qatada. He said that “real risk” would remain until Jordan reformed its law—either through authoritative case law or amendments to its Code of Criminal Procedure—to the effect that a prosecutor must prove to a high standard that statements used in court against a returning fugitive have not been procured by torture.

Qatada, whose real name is Omar Othman, has spent seven years in custody but has never been charged with an offence. This week’s ruling (Othman v Home Secretary [2012] UK/SIAC 15/2005) means the case could drag on for several more years.

However, the government is determined to deport Qatada, and secured further assurances from the Jordanian government following the European Court of Human Rights ruling. These included assurances that Qatada’s case would be heard by civilian not military judges; that his conviction in absentia would be quashed; and that Qatada’s lawyers would be able to cross-examine his co-defendants.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The government strongly disagrees with this ruling.

“We have obtained assurances not just in relation to the treatment of Qatada himself, but about the quality of the legal processes that would be followed throughout his trial. Indeed, today’s ruling found that ‘the Jordanian judiciary, like their executive counterparts, are determined to ensure that the appellant will receive, and be seen to receive, a fair retrial’. We will therefore seek leave to appeal today’s decision.”

Issue: 7538 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

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