Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-w588h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-03T00:20:19.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Othman (Abu Qatada) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department

United Kingdom, England.  12 November 2012 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

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
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)