Government ‘abused power’ over Afghan hijackers

The government abused its power when dealing with nine Afghan asylum seekers who hijacked a plane in order to be allowed into the UK, a judge has ruled.

At the high court today, Mr Justice Sullivan delivered a damning verdict against the government, accusing it of ‘conspicuous unfairness amounting to an abuse of power’ in relation to the incident six years ago.

Nine Afghan nationals had taken over a plane armed with knives and guns in an effort to force the British government to grant them asylum in February 2000.

They diverted the Boeing 727 from Kabul to London, landing at Stansted airport in Essex and threatened to blow up the plane unless their demands are met.

Mr Justice Sullivan ruled that the government had ‘deliberately delayed’ implementing a 2004 appeal ruling, which decreed that, under human rights laws, the nine could not be sent back to Afghanistan.

Instead it had allowed them to live in temporary accommodation in and around London with restrictions on their movements as afforded to temporary immigrants.

‘Lest there be any misunderstanding, the issue in this case is not whether the executive should take action to discourage hijacking, but whether the executive should be required to take such action within the law as laid down by parliament and the courts,’ Mr Justice Sullivan said as he ordered the government to pay indemnity costs.

Responding to the decision, both the government and the Conservatives expressed their disappointment.

Home Office minister Tony McNulty said his department would consider an appeal, saying it was ‘common sense’ not to reward people guilty of hijacking with leave to remain in the UK.

‘That is why the Home Office introduced a policy that, depending on the circumstances of the case, enabled the secretary of state not to grant leave of any sort to people who are excluded from international protection and instead keep them on temporary admission,’ he said.

Shadow home secretary David Davis added that he was surprised at the decision, saying it was ‘extraordinary’ that Britain was necessitated to keep Afghan asylum seekers in the country ‘for no justifiable reason’.

An appeal court in June 2004 quashed earlier convictions of false imprisonment, possessing firearms with intent to cause fear of violence and possessing explosives against the nine Afghans.

© 2006 Adfero Ltd.