WE CAN’T DEPORT ‘STRESSED’ TALIBAN TERRORIST
Fiasco as judge grants militant asylum in Scotland – because he’s anxious about WAR
A TALIBAN terrorist has won the right to live in Scotland in the latest human rights legal fiasco.
The member of the Islamic fundamentalist group – which was responsible for the deaths of more than 400 British soldiers during a 13-year conflict in Afghanistan – was granted asylum after a judge in Glasgow ruled he would not get proper medical help in his home country for post-traumatic stress he suffered during the war.
The 41-year-old, who we cannot name because a legal ruling protects his identity, had also claimed that he should not be sent back to Afghanistan because the current regime is hostile to the Taliban, putting him in danger.
Despite the Government insisting he should be deported, an immigration judge ruled that it would breach his
human rights to send him home. The decision has sparked fury.
Colonel Richard Kemp, a former British commander in Afghanistan, said: ‘This Taliban terrorist should be immediately deported to Afghanistan, where he can be dealt with by the Afghan government.
‘To allow this man to remain here is to prioritise his human rights above the lives of innocent civilians who are his potential victims here. Allowing him to remain is a direct insult to the many British troops who fought and died to prevent Taliban terrorism.’
Former Secretary of State for Defence Dr Liam Fox said: ‘There will be many who will find it inexplicable that someone who may have fought and killed members of our armed forces is given leave to remain in the United Kingdom.’
General Sir Richard Dannatt, former head of the British Army, said: ‘If he has renounced his affiliation to the Taliban and wants to live as a member of mainstream British society, then I think we could incorporate him.
‘But if he still has radical Islamic views and is still pro-Taliban at heart, I have sympathy for soldiers who feel that we shouldn’t be giving succour to someone who, frankly, fought against us.’
A former Scottish soldier injured by the Taliban in Afghanistan called the ruling ‘outrageous’.
The man, who asked to remain anonymous, said: ‘I didn’t get a chance to say, “Don’t set that bomb off, I want to keep my legs”.
‘It’s outrageous to have the immigration system turn against you.’
The terrorist at the centre of the case is an Afghan citizen born in 1979. He is a Pashtu speaker and is married, although his wife now lives in neighbouring Pakistan.
He arrived in the UK in 2015 and applied for asylum. His claim was rejected by the UK Government and he was ordered to leave. However, over the next five years he used taxpayers’ cash to fund six appeals – all of them rejected.
In January last year he lodged a new case. Astonishingly, his argument to stay was built around being a member of the terrorist organisation that fought British troops.
He produced a document, apparently an arrest warrant from the Afghani authorities, stating that he ‘was involved in terrorist activities with the Taliban’.
The document stated that he had ‘fought with the Taliban against the Afghan authorities’ under a commander who was directing ‘terrorist activities’. At a tribunal hearing in Glasgow in January, the man played down his role, claiming he had been a mere driver.
His lawyers argued that the man had a genuine fear of persecution if returned to Afghanistan.
In a newly released ruling, tribunal judge F. O’Hagan said that it was not credible that the Afghan authorities would still be looking for him. She concluded: ‘This new evidence has not demonstrated that the appellant has a wellfounded fear of persecution.’
However, the terrorist also claimed that being sent back would breach Article 8 of the European
Convention on Human Rights, protecting ‘private and family life’.
The judge ruled that the man suffers depression and anxiety as well as post-traumatic stress disorder. She said: ‘There would be significant obstacles to him gaining access to the exceptionally few mental health specialists who service the country.
‘In those circumstances there is a high probability of a significant deterioration in the appellant’s mental health. The appeal is allowed under Article 8.’
The Taliban are an Islamic group who controlled much of Afghanistan in the late 1990s.
After the September 11 terror attacks in 2001, the US accused the Taliban of protecting those responsible and invaded.
British troops were deployed in November 2001 and fought Taliban insurgents for the next 13 years.
‘Allowing him to remain a direct insult to troops’ ‘There will be many who will find it inexplicable’