- SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors online activity from terrorist groups, said al-Shabaab had issued a warning on militant forums
By Jack Doyle
|
Threats: Abu Qatada leaving his London home earlier this week
Militants have threatened to plunge Britain into 'disaster' with a wave of terror attacks if hate cleric Abu Qatada is deported to Jordan.
In a statement posted to a militant web forum, Al Qaeda warned Britain that his expulsion would open 'the gates of evil that will harm (Britain) and its subjects.'
SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors online activity from terrorist groups, said that Somalia's al-Qaeda-linked militant group al-Shabab also issued a warning on militant forums Monday.
'The British public is also forewarned that it will be the British government, as a result of its imprudence, that shall be liable for any disaster that befalls them, or their national interests,' the statement said, according to SITE.
Yesterday it emerged that Qatada could be back on the streets within weeks as the row over botched efforts to deport him continued to rage.
An immigration judge said he would reconsider bail if the fanatic's removal from Britain was not 'imminent'.
The ruling was a further blow to embattled Home Secretary Theresa May as she continued to insist there had been no blunder by her officials over Qatada's case.
Facing down her critics in the Commons, Mrs May accepted she would take 'full responsibility' for any mistakes. She said: 'This is not a question of what officials have done. I take full responsibility.'
Discovery: SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors online activity from terrorist groups, said that Somalia's al-Qaeda-linked militant group al-Shabab also issued a warning on militant forums Monday
Backbench Tory MPs demanded Britain's withdrawal from the European Court of Human Rights.
In an exchange with Mrs May yesterday, Tory MP Charles Walker said: 'You must not delay in getting this scumbag and his murderous mates on a plane out of this country. And in so doing would you send a metaphorical two fingers to the ECHR?'
Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper taunted Mrs May for 'partying with X Factor judges' while the Government's case collapsed after she was pictured at a glitzy celebrity party attended by Tulisa Contostavlos, as well as Kelly Brook and Lorraine Kelly
Miss Cooper also warned the 'farce had serious consequences' and raised the prospect of Qatada suing the Government for wrongful arrest.
Legal experts appeared to side against Mrs May's assertion that the true deadline for Qatada's lawyers to lodge an appeal in the case to Strasbourg was Monday night.
Denials: Home Secretary Theresa May, pictured today, continues to insist there had been no blunder by her officials over Qatada's case
On Tuesday Mrs May ordered his arrest and told the Commons the time period for a further legal claim had passed. But Strasbourg officials last night repeated their belief that the true deadline was midnight on Tuesday night and the case was lodged 'just in time'.
David Cameron exposed his own powerlessness over the affair, saying: 'I sometimes wish I could put him on a plane and take him to Jordan myself.'
The prospect of the radical cleric walking the streets again only a short time after he was put back in Belmarsh high-security prison will horrify the public.
After his arrest on Tuesday he appeared before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, a special terror court, and was remanded to the jail.
But in a ruling released yesterday, judge Mr Justice Mitting said: 'If it is obvious after two or three weeks have elapsed that deportation is not imminent… then I will reconsider bail along the basis of a more leisurely timetable than that necessarily required for a full-blown appeal to SIAC.'
The Home Office has attacked the European Court of Human Rights over its handling of the deportation
Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said he could not see what the 'big deal was' over the apparent blunder.
Called to the Commons to explain the affair, Mrs May said: 'The Government is clear that Qatada has no right to refer the case to the Grand Chamber of the ECHR since the three-month deadline to do so lapsed at midnight on Monday.'
She was given strong support from the Tory backbenches, but MPs also insisted she should defy the European Court of Human Rights anyway.
Tory Mark Spencer said the saga risked painting the UK as a 'safe haven' for terrorists, while Sir Peter Tapsell said it was time the UK 'withdrew its legal processes' from the European Court.
Bill Cash, chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee, said: 'You have tried your best, there is no question about that. But unfortunately it is not working.
'The root cause of this is the question of what is the rule of law, whose rule of law and who interprets it?
'It should be decided in this House. We should withdraw from the European Convention, we should repeal the Human Rights Act and we should get the matter straight because the people of this country demand it.'
Labour seized on comments from an ECHR spokesman which confirmed its view that the deadline was Tuesday.
A panel of five judges of the court will make a final ruling on admissibility, but that could be several months away.
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES FOR MAY
What a difference a day makes. On Tuesday Theresa May was cheered in the Commons after ordering the arrest of fanatic Abu Qatada.
His removal from the country appeared, if not imminent, then at least on the near horizon.
But by Wednesday the Home Office timetable was in ruins after his legal team launched a further appeal to the Strasbourg court.
Mrs May, and her team of highly paid lawyers and silks, are insistent that the deadline for an appeal passed on Monday night and the appeal, submitted at 11pm on Tuesday, was late and should be rejected.
Court officials appeared to side with Qatada's lawyers, and a final ruling on the issue will be made by a panel of Strasbourg judges. So who is right – and were the Government's legal team, as Keith Vaz put it, outwitted by a firm of North London legal aid lawyers?
At first glance, the European Convention on Human Rights seems unambiguous, and backs up Mrs May's case.
Article 43 states: 'Within a period of three months from the date of the judgment of the Chamber, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber.'
So if a written appeal has not been received within that time, the original judgment becomes final.
So far so straightforward? Sadly no.
The question that remains is when does the clock start ticking? Is it, as the Government maintains, on the day the judgment is handed down, or is it the following day?
Mrs May must now wait anxiously for the final decision to be made by a panel of the court, and that could be months away, further delaying efforts to kick out Qatada and bolstering his case for bail.
Why the hell does he want to stay here if our way of life is so abhorrent to him? Get rid of the lot of them!
- Babs, Stockport, 20/4/2012 18:27
Report abuse