Judges
accuse Blunkett over terror suspect
Audrey Gillan, The Guardian, Tuesday March 9, 2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,1165089,00.html
Judges yesterday accused the home secretary
of detaining a man for 16 months in a high security
prison without charge or trial on evidence that was "wholly
unreliable and should not have been
used to justify detention".
They ruled that David Blunkett
had used evidence that was "not
reasonable" and "exaggerated" links
with al-Qaida in order to detain the man on suspicion of being
an international terrorist. They
ordered that the 37-year-old Libyan be released from Belmarsh
high security prison last night.
But in defiance of the judgment, the Home Office interceded
to prevent the man, called M for legal
reasons, being released, saying it wished to appeal against the
decision. The government was
granted a 24 hour stay in an emergency hearing with a judge and
the matter will be considered at
the court of appeal today.
The man is the only one of 13 detainees to win his appeal against
detention.
The home secretary is adamant
that the man is a threat to national security and should remain
locked up. But three judges sitting at the Special Immigration
Appeals Commission (SIAC) said he
had made assertions that were not supported by evidence and some
that were "clearly misleading".
Mr Blunkett had consistently exaggerated the extent to which
documentary evidence linked M with
al-Qaida.
The three judges said: "There
can be no doubt that al-Qaida and those who support its aims
do
constitute a very real threat. However, although we pay the greatest
respect to the views of the
respondent [the home secretary] and those who advise him, we
would be failing in our duty if we did
not act on our own judgment. We believe that the assessments
placed before us and the
respondent are not reliable and that reasonable suspicion is
not established."
Much of the evidence against
M was heard in secret with none of his legal team allowed to
attend.
Assertions made, some by security service witnesses, were "clearly
misleading when the source
documents are looked at and some can only be justified if the
worst possible view is taken of the
appellant". A special branch report was "inaccurate
and conveyed an unfair impression".
As soon as the appeal was granted, lawyers for the home secretary
said he would ap peal. Mr
Justice Collins, one of the judges, told them they were trying
to dress up something they did not
like as a point of law.
M's lawyer, Gareth Peirce,
said outside the court: "The
home secretary has always said that SIAC
could deliver justice. We have always said that it could not,
that it has hearings in secret and we
could not represent our clients."
She added: "The home
secretary... is making more than a mockery of justice."
M has been held in Belmarsh along with eight other detainees
under emergency legislation rushed
through parliament after the September 11 attacks. The Anti-Terrorism,
Crime and Security Act
2001 allows the home secretary to detain foreign nationals without
charge or trial indefinitely if he
suspects they may be involved in terrorism.
M has admitted that he has been involved with a group opposed
to Colonel Gadafy's regime in
Libya. He claimed asylum in the UK in 1994 but was refused, though
he was never removed.
Yesterday, the judges also
dismissed the appeal of Abu Qatada, the London-based Muslim
cleric
regarded by intelligence sources as one of al-Qaida's main spiritual
leaders in Europe, saying "he is
a truly dangerous individual".
They said: "The appellant
was heavily involved, indeed was at the centre in the UK of
terrorist
activities associated with al-Qaida."
|