Othman (Abu Qatada) v United Kingdom
Deporting Abu Qatada to Jordan would breach article 6, because there was a real risk that he would face a flagrant denial of justice through the use of evidence obtained by torture at his retrial.
Facts
Omar Othman, known as Abu Qatada, a Jordanian national who was considered a dangerous terrorist suspect, had been convicted in his absence in Jordan of terrorist offences. The United Kingdom sought to deport him to Jordan for retrial, having obtained diplomatic assurances from Jordan that he would not be ill treated. He claimed that deportation would breach article 3, because of the risk of torture, and article 6, because evidence obtained by torturing his co-defendants would be used against him at his retrial.
Legal principle
The European Court of Human Rights held that deportation would not breach article 3, because the diplomatic assurances, which had been negotiated in detail and were subject to monitoring, removed the real risk of ill treatment. However, deportation would breach article 6, because there was a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice, by reason of the admission at his retrial of evidence obtained by torture of third persons. The court said that the use of evidence obtained by torture would be a flagrant denial of justice, because torture is one of the most fundamental violations of human rights. Abu Qatada was deported to Jordan in 2013, after a treaty was concluded guaranteeing that such evidence would not be used, and he was later acquitted.
Related cases on deportation, removal and human rights
- Agyarko v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 11, [2017] 1 WLR 823
- AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 17, [2021] AC 633
- Beoku-Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 39, [2009] 1 AC 115
- Chahal v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413
- EB (Kosovo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 41, [2009] 1 AC 1159
- Hesham Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 60, [2016] 1 WLR 4799
- Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] UKHL 11, [2007] 2 AC 167
- Kiarie v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Byndloss v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42, [2017] 1 WLR 2380
Studying immigration and asylum law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
