Nine Afghan asylum seekers who hijacked a plane to Britain six years ago have won a High Court battle for permission to enter Britain as refugees

Daily Telegraph:

Mr Justice Sullivan, the presiding judge, launched a scathing attack on the way the Home Office had handled the case, describing it as "an abuse of power by a public authority at the highest level".

In February 2000 the hijackers seized an internal flight from Kabul and forced it to divert to Britain.

They threatened to blow up the Boeing 727 at Stansted Airport, Essex, and kill some of the 173 passengers in a four-day stand-off with police.

The question of what should happen to the nine and their families led to one of the most serious clashes between the Government and the judiciary over human rights law.

In December 2001, all nine were convicted of hijacking, false imprisonment, possessing firearms with intent to cause fear of violence and possessing explosives, but two years later their convictions were quashed by the Court of Appeal, which found they had been acting under duress.

Successive home secretaries have refused to grant the nine leave to enter the UK and allowed them only temporary admission, fearing that to allow them to live and work freely in Britain would amount to "a charter for future hijackers".

But Mr Justice Sullivan said the Government had "deliberately delayed" implementing an adjudication appeal panel's decision that, under human rights law, the nine could not be sent back to Afghanistan where their lives would be at risk.

He made an unprecedented order that the Home Office should pay legal costs on an indemnity basis - the highest level possible - to show his "disquiet and concern".

He said of the case: "It is difficult to conceive of a clearer case of 'conspicuous unfairness amounting to an abuse of power'."

He added: "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."

Tony McNulty, Home Office minister, said the Government is considering whether to appeal.

"It is common-sense that to deter hijacking and international terrorism individuals should not be rewarded with leave to remain in the UK," he said.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, described the judge's verdict as "extraordinary".

He said: "Time after time this Government puts in new laws supposedly to protect the public but because it does not exercise the care and attention to detail necessary, we end up with laws that do not achieve their original intention - in fact, they often achieve the opposite.

"It is extraordinary that under this Government we can extradite apparently innocent businessmen at the same time as keeping Afghan asylum seekers in the UK for no justifiable reason."

Government appeal over hijackers

Human rights and this asylum fiasco