No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Othman (Abu Qatada) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Abstract
Aliens — Immigration and deportation — Deportation of non-national to State of nationality — Appellant deemed to be danger to national security — Deportation order authorized by Home Secretary — Non-enforcement of deportation order pending outcome of European Court of Human Rights proceedings — Strasbourg judgment — Home Secretary notifying appellant of intention to deport to native Jordan — Refusal by Home Secretary of appellant’s request to revoke deportation order — Appellant appealing against Home Secretary’s decision — Whether decision satisfying test identified by Strasbourg Court — Whether Home Secretary’s discretion should have been exercised differently — Section 86(3)(b) of Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
Human rights — Right to a fair trial — Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Prohibition on use of evidence obtained by torture — Test to be applied in “foreign” Article 6 cases — Test identified by Strasbourg Court — Assessment of risks — Risk that statements obtained by torture admitted in evidence at appellant’s retrial — Factors giving rise to risk — Whether appellant would be subjected to flagrantly unfair trial in Jordan — Evidence — Determinative question — Whether real risk impugned statements would be admitted as probative of appellant’s guilt at retrial under Jordanian law — Jordanian law — Application by three civilian judges in State Security Court — Admissibility of statements under Article 148.2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure — Whether real risk statements admitted even though real risk they were obtained by torture — Whether Home Secretary establishing no real risk impugned statements would be admitted — Whether deportation would violate Article 6 — Whether test identified by Strasbourg Court satisfied — Whether Home Secretary’s discretion should have been exercised differently — Whether appellant’s deportation order should be revoked
Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Convention against Torture, 1984, Article 15 — Strasbourg case law — Evidence obtained by torture — Admission — Whether European Convention standards imposed on foreign States — Whether requirement for prosecution in Jordanian case to prove no real risk statement obtained by torture — Jordanian law — Relevance
Human rights — Prohibition of torture — Assurances by Jordanian Government about treatment of appellant on return to Jordan — Whether providing sufficient guarantee of protection against risk of ill-treatment by Jordanian State agents — Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Human rights — Right to liberty of person — Crime Prevention Law 7 of 1954 — Whether real risk Jordanian authorities would invoke law to secure appellant’s detention if acquittal followed retrial — Article 5 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Terrorism — Appellant deemed to be danger to national security in United Kingdom — Deportation order for appellant to return to native Jordan — Whether deportation would violate Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether test identified by Strasbourg Court satisfied — Exercise of Home Secretary’s discretion — Whether revocation of deportation order appropriate — The law of England
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press 2013