1. Post #1
    Gold Member
    smurfy's Avatar
    October 2007
    22,057 Posts
    The BBC has taken the Ministry of Justice to court over its refusal to allow an interview with Babar Ahmad, who has been detained on terrorism charges for over 7 years without a trial.
    Ahmad has been detained for so long due to his prolonged legal battle against extradition to the US, in which he is awaiting a final European Court of Human Rights ruling.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16111981

    BBC News posted:
    The BBC and one of its reporters has launched a court challenge to the justice secretary's decision not to allow a face-to-face interview with a terror suspect.

    The corporation wants to speak to Babar Ahmad, 38, who has been detained for more than seven years without trial.

    The British Muslim denies terror-related charges and is fighting extradition to the US.

    He is being held in a special detainee unit in Worcestershire.

    Justice Secretary Ken Clarke's decision to refuse the BBC permission to interview Mr Ahmad was challenged at the High Court in London by the corporation and home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani.

    Lord Pannick QC for the BBC told the court that the Ministry of Justice had initially granted permission to meet Mr Ahmad in Long Lartin prison but then withdrew the offer after the corporation argued the interview should be filmed.

    He added that Mr Clarke's decision unlawfully infringed the BBC's freedom of speech under the European Convention on Human Rights and the decision to block an interview failed to take into account the exceptionally unsual nature of Mr Ahmad's case.

    The MoJ has rules on how journalists can meet prisoners which the BBC has not challenged.

    'Prematurely aged'

    The BBC legal challenge is being supported by Mr Ahmad's lawyers, who argue that a broadcast interview is the only way to communicate the psychological and physical impact that arrest and detention have had on their client.

    At the hearing, Mr Ahmad's lawyers pleaded for the BBC to be allowed to show their client's "prematurely aged" face.

    Mr Ahmad is is waiting for a European Court of Human Rights to rule on whether or not he should be extradited.

    The US authorities accuse him of soliciting and raising funds over the internet for terrorism "in Afghanistan, Chechnya and other places".

    Mr Ahmad was injured when he was arrested by the Metropolitan Police at his home in south London in 2004.

    The force later admitted liability and paid him 60,000 in damages although a jury subsequently found four police officers not guilty of assaulting him and they were also cleared of misconduct.

    The High Court is expected to give its ruling on the BBC's challenge in January.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Winner Winner x 5 (list)

  2. Post #2
    Gold Member
    Mr. Bleak's Avatar
    March 2011
    4,991 Posts
    I don't know a whole lot about British politics, but there has to be something similar to the U.S with their speedy trial clause.

    Why's he been held this long?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP United States Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  3. Post #3
    This probably isn't a good idea
    Camundongo's Avatar
    October 2007
    3,400 Posts
    I don't know a whole lot about British politics, but there has to be something similar to the U.S with their speedy trial clause.

    Why's he been held this long?
    Partially because you chaps want him, and he's been appealing against it. I'm guessing he's been refused bail at the same time.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  4. Post #4
    st_nick5's Avatar
    May 2007
    711 Posts
    Why does the US want him if he was arrested in the UK? What's it got to do with them?

  5. Post #5
    This probably isn't a good idea
    Camundongo's Avatar
    October 2007
    3,400 Posts
    Why does the US want him if he was arrested in the UK? What's it got to do with them?
    It's in the article:

    The US authorities accuse him of soliciting and raising funds over the internet for terrorism "in Afghanistan, Chechnya and other places".
    Why the US can have him, I don't know.

  6. Post #6
    Gold Member
    Occlusion's Avatar
    March 2008
    6,644 Posts
    The BBC is definitely the best news outlet on the planet. Rarely see them ever put a slant on anything.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 2Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  7. Post #7
    Gold Member
    Contag's Avatar
    July 2010
    11,827 Posts
    The BBC is definitely the best news outlet on the planet. Rarely see them ever put a slant on anything.
    I'd say Al Jazeera is best.
    BBC tends to be reasonable, though.

    For what reason why the interview revoked? As in what justification?