As was widely reported yesterday, Abu Qatada succeeded in his appeal against deportation yesterday. Here’s the judgment (he’s also known as Omar Othman). The Court of Appeal has reversed the ruling of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission as having erred in law by applying the wrong test in its analysis of Abu Qatada’s human rights complaint. In essence, he argued that the UK will breach the article 6 Convention right to a fair hearing if it deports him to Jordan where there is a real risk that he’ll be tried using evidence obtained by torture. SIAC had thought this would only breach article 6 if, looking at this together with other aspects of the potential trial process, there would be unfairness amounting to a total denial of justice; but the Court of Appeal’s view is that the question of evidence gained through torture is a separate question because of its clear link to the absolute bar on torture under the article 3 Convention right. SIAC did not satisfy itself properly that tainted evidence would not be used, and so its ruling was unlawful.
There must still be some chance that the government will succeed in deporting Abu Qatada, though: if SIAC now considers his deportation applying the correct test, it is possible it may be satisfied that the tainted evidence will not be used. No doubt, too, though, that that would lead to further appeals from Abu Qatada.
Leave a comment