Woe!
"I will be held, if I am convicted, in solitary confinement, for the rest of my life in very harsh conditions, with probably no possibility of parole. I am a disabled man and have no arms and there will be very little granted to me to alleviate that."
In the grand legal tradition of the mother country, Canada has experienced no end of difficulties ridding itself of failed refugee and immigration claimants most of whom, because they become familiar with the democratic laws of the country favouring the individual in reflection of the Constitution and Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, one appeal after another can take place, costing the government tax dollars and exhausting all legal avenues, eating up years in the effort.
This is the legacy of legal protections under the law that Canadians treasure, and which are extended to all those whose feet touch Canadian soil. The tedious, cumbersome and lengthy procedures tie up the courts and government agencies' patience, while benefiting those whose claims are very often vexatious in nature, enabling them to continue enjoying the generous social benefits that Canada is renowned for.
The situation is an inherited one. From the Mother Country, from the colonial outreach period when Great Britain ruled the seas and spread her influence far and wide throughout the Commonwealth. What has made justice groan to a stumbling halt in Canada in attempts to extradite unwanted claimants whose claims are deemed to be illegitimate, or those who have committed criminal acts while in Canada, occurs with regularity in Britain as well, since it is the fount of these judicial strangleholds on sovereign decision-making.
Britain experienced a problem that has become common enough throughout Europe and North America; the troublesome and worrying presence of agents - often clerics - of fanatical Islamism who seek converts to radical violent jihad in the name of extending Islamist influence worldwide through intimidation, fear and violence. From mosques and Muslim community centres youth graduated into jihad in support of Islamism, some going abroad to fight 'wars' against the infidel, some remaining behind to become home-grown jihadists prepared to defend the ideology of violent jihad right at home.
Eight years ago Britain took steps to begin extradition procedures of one of its most notorious jihadist extremists whom the United States requested on a 2004 warrant for organizing military training camps there and for being implicated in abductions that took place in Yemen. Abu Hamza, a man dedicated to the violent overthrow of democracy to replace it with Islamist rule and Sharia law, invested in converting young Muslims to rabid jihadists has taken advantage of all the appeal mechanisms available to him over the years.
Just recently the BBC made a public apology when one of its regular interviewers revealed injudiciously that Queen Elizabeth II during an interview had stated her bemusement and annoyance at the fact that her country was not able to speedily dispatch this man out of Britain and into the waiting arms of the American justice system. It obviously represented a source of frustration and anger to the Monarch that her country could be held to judicial ransom by its own laws to the benefit of such a malevolent figure.
And now, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge reveals that this situation represented "a real source of fury" to him that such egregious situations would exist. Emphasizing the "great public interest" that terrorism cases be dealt with expeditiously and expressing his frustration at the absurdity of a known terror felon being able to pull such delaying tactics using the law that was meant to protect individuals from harm, in the case of someone like this cleric devoted to causing harm to others.
Perhaps the most absurd and bedevilling part of the entire situation is that Abu Hamza piteously clings to exhortations that people have pity on him. That it should be kept uppermost in mind of those who seek justice on behalf of those whom he has harmed, that in so doing he would be harmed and that would be simply dreadful. He could, he insists, face a life sentence in a maximum security prison if convicted, and that would represent an affront to European human rights prohibitions against torture and ill treatment.
While it was perfectly legitimate, ethical and moral on behalf of jihad for this cleric representing the tenets of Islam to decry the perfidious debasement of the West and his contempt for the inferiority of infidels deserving to die to satisfy sadistic jihadists in their mission to find salvation in Paradise in recognition of their heroic status as martyrs successful in human slaughter, his human rights should be viewed as inviolable.
The way has been cleared, finally, for British courts to act to expedite the removal of this menace from the country. Abu Hamza's plea to the European Court to have mercy on him, as a poor, misunderstood man with unfortunate disabilities hasn't worked its magic. The Strasbourg court ruled that "no violation" of this man's human rights would be breached, clearing the way for this miserable saga to come to a long-deserved end.
But not, alas, until yet another appeal has been heard in England, still blocking the extradition.
Labels: Britain, Canada, Democracy, Human Rights, Islamism, Justice, Terrorism
posted by Pieface @ Friday, September 28, 2012
<< Home