Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Judges 3, Politicians 0

Another day, another Home Office strategy overturned by the courts.

Abu Qatada, the firebrand preacher once described as "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe", won his fight against deportation from Britain today.

With thanks to Judge Anthony Clarke (Oakham and Cambridge) and two other unamed Appeal Court judges (Lord Justice Buxton and ??).

The Government's anti-terror policy was dealt a second massive blow as the courts forced the Home Office to abandon its deportation case against 12 other terror suspects.

They've blocked the deportation on the grounds that he might be tortured in Jordan. Yet Peter Andre seems to have got on OK there.

The strange thing is that NuLab judges seem happy to sent British citizens off for trial in other jurisdictions, even for things which aren't an offence here. The Natwest Three were probably guilty of committing crime in the UK, not the States. The Howes' sold red phosphorous and iodine, the former a precursor chemical in the manufacture of methamphetamine but perfectly legal to possess and sell in the UK. They're on their way to the States where they may face 100-year sentences. (Neither the Howes nor the NW3 would be on my Christmas card list, but that's not the point) The new European Arrest Warrant may enable Britons to be extradited for "crimes" which are not illegal under UK law and are "committed" in the UK.

None of the people benefitting from the Appeal Court's decision are British subjects. They should not in such a case have the protections which British citizens (even unpleasant jihadis) should have. What may or may not happen to them overseas should not be the concern of a UK court.

Thousands of highly skilled migrants who were faced with deportation can now stay in Britain, a court ruled yesterday. The ruling is a blow to the Government and its attempt to demonstrate to the public that it is taking a tough stance to meet concern over the extent of immigration.

Sir George Newman, a High Court judge, branded the new rules unfair ... in November 2006 the Government suspended the scheme for a month after it was found that some migrants had entered on forged papers, others were working in unskilled jobs and some were not working at all.

Unfair to whom ?

A wealthy lawyer who killed his wife after she had an affair is set to inherit nearly £1million from her will after being freed from jail. Christopher Lumsden, 54, was said to have "snapped" after his wife Alison, 53, announced she was leaving him for a family friend. He attacked her at their £1.4million mansion, slashing her on the face and neck with a knife so badly a pathologist could not count the number of wounds she had suffered. Lumsden, a partner at the international law firm Pinsent Masons, was cleared of murder but jailed for five years for manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

The jury heard that the father-of-two was suffering from a "depressive condition" at the time of the attack after being diagnosed with muscular dystrophy. He was released on licence last September after serving around 18 months of his sentence and is now in line to receive £1million from her will, made five years before her death.

By law, a person convicted of manslaughter cannot inherit money from his victim. But the courts can make an exception if the killer suffered from a mental disorder at the time of the crime.

I imagine our wealthy lawyer will be found to be one of those exceptions.

One million voters have been added to the electoral register in only two years following the introduction of the Electoral Administration Act. New applicants do not have to provide documents proving their identity or even whether they are in the country legally. Instead, they simply fill in a two-page form and declare that the details are correct. The surge in voter numbers coincides with hundreds of thousands of immigrants coming to Britain from eastern Europe and elsewhere. After the introduction of the Electoral Administration Act in 2006, the roll increased by 513,054 and a further 463,340 in 2007.

Last night, a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "There are all sorts of reasons why people join the electoral register and it is just not correct to say that the pattern of migration is the sole, or even most significant, reason."

At least this one is wholly down to the Government. They're heaping up the funeral pyre nicely.


Guardian apostate said...

The flat I live in has a shared letter box with two others. Both are one bedroom and much smaller than mine. Yesterday my poll card was delivered. At the same time there were four cards for the top flat where there's very definitely only one person living. All were 'Asian' names and none of the names were his. They weren't previous tenants because they were English with names to match. Illegal immigrants? Postal vote fraud? Some other type of fraud? Who knows? One thing's for certain the Government definitely don't. I've mulled it over and I'm going to make a few calls tomorrow.

Foxy Brown said...

I don't mean to be so London-centric, but it means another four bloody years of Livingstone, how depressing.

Anonymous said...

Nu Labour; Importing Voters so you don't matter.

I think the Government knows, and is quite happy for the fraud to go on.

dearieme said...

The opportunity for fraud is quite deliberate and is a consequence of cheerful racism on Labour's part. "Our" voters are from ethnic/religious groups who are particularly likely to cheat, they thought, so let's give them ample chance.