Log in

View Full Version : Hijackers



chance
11-05-2006, 14:46
Should they be allowed to stay?

The government has said it will appeal against a decision to allow nine Afghan hijackers to stay in Britain because it was unsafe for them to return home.
Home Secretary John Reid said it was important to challenge any ruling which may "appear inexplicable or bizarre to the general public".

A High Court judge ruled the nine, involved in a four-day stand-off at Stansted Airport in 2000, could remain.

Prime Minister Tony Blair had said the ruling was an "abuse of common sense".

In a statement in Downing Street, Mr Reid said: "When decisions are taken which appear inexplicable or bizarre to the general public, it only reinforces the perception that the system is not working to protect or in favour of the vast majority of ordinary decent, hard-working citizens in this country.

"That is a perception that should worry all of us and it is a perception that all of us should be working to put right."

'Abuse of justice'

The hijacking led to asylum applications from 78 people on board.

"We can't have a situation in which people who hijack a plane, we're not able to deport back to their country," Mr Blair said on Wednesday.

"It's not an abuse of justice for us to order their deportation, it's an abuse of common sense frankly to be in a position where we can't do this.

It is difficult to conceive of a clearer case of 'conspicuous unfairness amounting to an abuse of power'

Mr Justice Sullivan

To deter hijacking and international terrorism, individuals should not be "rewarded with leave to remain in the UK", the Home Office said.

A spokesman said it had introduced a policy that enabled the secretary of state not to grant leave to people who are "excluded from international protection" and keep them on temporary admission visas.

Serious clash

The question of what should happen to the nine and their families had caused a serious clash between the government and the judiciary over human rights law.

High Court judge Mr Justice Sullivan expressed his anger over the way ministers failed to follow correct legal procedures and "deliberately delayed" implementing an adjudication appeal panel's decision from two years ago.

Their ruling in June 2004 meant that, under human rights law, the nine could not be sent back to Afghanistan where their lives would be at risk.

The judge also made an unprecedented order that the Home Office should pay legal costs on an indemnity basis - the highest level possible - to show his "disquiet and concern".

Convictions quashed

The nine men were jailed at the Old Bailey in 2001 for hijacking the Ariana Boeing 727 on an internal flight in Afghanistan.

Appeal judges quashed the convictions in May 2003 but insisted that their decision was "not a charter for future hijackers". They said a mistake in directing the jury was the only reason the men's appeal had succeeded.

Successive home secretaries had failed to grant the Afghans discretionary leave to enter the UK.

The nine were only permitted temporary admission, due to fears that to allow them to live and work freely in Britain would amount to "a charter for future hijackers".

However, Mr Justice Sullivan said: "It is difficult to conceive of a clearer case of 'conspicuous unfairness amounting to an abuse of power'."

He went on: "Lest there be any misunderstanding, the issue in this case is not whether the executive should take action to discourage hijacking, but whether the executive should be required to take such action within the law as laid down by Parliament and the courts."

He ordered the home secretary to grant the nine "discretionary leave" to remain in the UK, subject to review every six months.

Lawyers for the family said the decision means, subject to any appeal, that the nine and their families will now be able to take up employment and "get on with their lives".

pookie1968uk
11-05-2006, 15:17
no, send them home now. our country is going mad with its soft approach to everything.

Cornishbabe
11-05-2006, 15:36
Wow chance your doing a lol of polls arnt you.

No they shouldnt be allowed to stay

Daisyduck
11-05-2006, 20:32
This country getting a joke dumping ground for all the rubbish other countrys dont want.
Do we really care if they get deported to there own country and then get killed. They think nothing about killing us.
Ive worked 30 years so far and sick of paying taxes for these waste of space people.:thumbsdow :thumbsdow

hazey
11-05-2006, 23:01
This country getting a joke dumping ground for all the rubbish other countrys dont want.
Do we really care if they get deported to there own country and then get killed. They think nothing about killing us.
Ive worked 30 years so far and sick of paying taxes for these waste of space people.:thumbsdow :thumbsdow Well said sis, I have to agree whole heartedly with you on this and I have always worked hard like you,but for 37 years,and now I have been told I cant retire till I am 63 and 4 months, and its 65 for you, so we work hard to keep people that should be deported,how fair is that.

Meh
12-05-2006, 00:30
This country getting a joke dumping ground for all the rubbish other countrys dont want.
Do we really care if they get deported to there own country and then get killed. They think nothing about killing us.
Ive worked 30 years so far and sick of paying taxes for these waste of space people.:thumbsdow :thumbsdow

I agree totally with the fact the we are being used as a dumping ground.

Actually I do care if they go back to their own country and get killed. Try putting a value on your life. The sterotype you have portrayed is the xenophobic cancer that is sweeping this nation. I've been to several third world countries and do you know what? They're not interested in killing us - in fact they welcome us. They're more concerned with putting food in the mouths of their families.

As for paying taxes, lets look at who has robbed us. Immigrants or the Govermment? Gordon Brown was the one that raided the pensions fund. And the second lot of people to blame are the selfish 40+ age group. They're the ones responsible for the high house prices and expecting the younger generation to support them when they retire. How are they going to do that when they've priced the younger generation out?

pookie1968uk
12-05-2006, 13:48
I agree totally with the fact the we are being used as a dumping ground.

Actually I do care if they go back to their own country and get killed. Try putting a value on your life. The sterotype you have portrayed is the xenophobic cancer that is sweeping this nation. I've been to several third world countries and do you know what? They're not interested in killing us - in fact they welcome us. They're more concerned with putting food in the mouths of their families.

As for paying taxes, lets look at who has robbed us. Immigrants or the Govermment? Gordon Brown was the one that raided the pensions fund. And the second lot of people to blame are the selfish 40+ age group. They're the ones responsible for the high house prices and expecting the younger generation to support them when they retire. How are they going to do that when they've priced the younger generation out?

its not nice to think what might happen to some that get sent back but what can we do? more and more countries are facing civil war, unrest etc but we cant take them all in can we? where can they all go?

dddMac1
12-05-2006, 15:03
this country is a Joke

they should be sent back to there own country where they belong

Johnny Allen
17-05-2006, 17:06
this country is a Joke

they should be sent back to there own country where they belong

exactly, and the sooner the better, why should we pay for their keep?