BBC.
OK, so no reason is given as to why his family couldn't visit him, he's under the order because he's liable to be deported and the police don't want him associating with extremists. Yet his rights trump all that and he's to be sent back to a place where he can mix again with extremists.The UK Supreme Court has ruled that an order which forced a terror suspect to live 150 miles away from his family breached his human rights.The control order forced the suspect, known as AP, to live under a 16-hour curfew in the Midlands while his family lived in London.
Seven judges agreed unanimously that this breached his human rights.
AP is on bail pending deportation to Ethiopia. His curfew under immigration law is longer than the control order.
Control orders were introduced under 2005 anti-terrorism legislation.
They enable ministers to sign an order to place a terrorism suspect under close supervision that some say is similar to house arrest.
In 2008, AP was ordered to live in the Midlands to keep him away from Islamist extremists in London.
His lawyers argued the control order isolated him from his family and breached his right to liberty.
Delivering the verdict, one of the seven judges, Sir John Dyson, said the home secretary must find out the effect of a control order before imposing it.
Once again a potential risk to our society is using the HRA to make a mockery of what ought to have been an obvious solution to a possibly dangerous situation, it's not as if the guy is a citizen either and is about to be deported, assuming he just doesn't vanish anyway.
The HRA needs to be scrapped or amended to take into account the rights of the majority to live without fear of a minority, it's been used and abused to allow some very dangerous individuals to walk free amongst the population and has given our security forces headaches as they try to keep tabs on them.
Now from a libertarian aspect the suspect should have a lot of rights and freedoms, however under a libertarian state he probably wouldn't be here as he'd get no benefits save what he'd earned himself, you come here, you work or you starve/rely on charity. It's not the job of the state in a libertarian society to feed you, keep you or house you. There are few rules under a libertarian state, but what there are, are rigorously enforced. You break the law and the state comes down on you like a ton of bricks and if you aren't legally here you're gone, no appeals.
I think a serious rethink of what is and isn't a human right needs to be done, but until we leave the EU, that's not going to happen and cases like this will occur on a regular basis.
{ 0 komentar... read them below or add one }
Post a Comment
Comment Here!