Friday, 21 May 2010

Human Rights why no agreement with Pakistan‏ and....

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the recent case where so called known terrorist could not be returned to Pakistan. I fail to understand why we don't have an agreement with Pakistan. Pakistan is both an ally and a commonwealth country, how can we not have an agreement with them that people returned to Pakistan won't be tortured.

If you remember how much hot water the last government got into when Britain was implicated in the torture of terror suspects because of the alleged use of CIA planes in British airspace and soil to take suspected terrorists for torture in secret camps abroad and the alleged MI5 Agent questioning of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed.

These situations are always blamed on the Human Rights Act (which I think should be reviewed) but is it not also a failing of diplomacy that we can't sent foreign nationals back if we believe they are part of a terror network?

Just imagine what would happen if it turned out Pakistani terror suspects were tortured and then found to not be terror suspects after all. The Daily Mail current says Human rights cave-in: Cameron pledged to scrap Act... now Clegg champions it under ANOTHER coalition compromise. Would it not change to a similar headline to this Torture, a cover-up and Labour's shame. Its very hard to get this right because it can all go so so wrong.

There is another issue that is not considered and thats prisoner release in Pakistan. Pakistan also release known terrorists, there is bribery and more chance of an attempted break out by milliants. So if you have a known terrorist and want to monitor them then sending them back to Pakistan is no guarantee of safety.

Another way to get people convicted is ensure that a jury can hear the case rather than a judge. There must be a way of protecting security information and operatives and providing evidence. Also control orders should be replaced with a better alternative such as a monitored open prison which would be better than a tag at home.

One more point if the Human Rights Act was changed or replaced by the British Bill of Rights and this meant you could send known terrorist back to countries known to torture, then won't the case simply go to the European court of Human Rights and end up costing the public even more money to get the same result?


  1. Why facebook is not allowed and ban, after they are apologizing...

  2. The other question is that, what are mulla people doing on Tv & Computers? They should not even look at these thing, mulla people will never learn a lesson.