Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

A Tale of Two Jurisdictions

The European Court of Human Rights has ordered a halt to the extradition of radical cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri to the US on terror charges.

Abu Hamza and three other British men complained about the length of sentence they may face if convicted in the US.

The British courts have already approved the extraditions, but they will now be delayed for further submissions to the Strasbourg court.

The poor petals! Someone perhaps ought to have told them beforehand that being involved in jihad is not a risk-free occupation. I mean your sacrifice is for Allah, the all knowing, the all merciful etc.

Meanwhile in Iran…

The lawyer for Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani fears the mother-of-two could be put to death at any time after she was found guilty of an affair while she was married.

The 43-year-old received 99 lashes in mid-2006 after she was convicted of an “illicit relationship” with two men after her husband’s death, according to Human Rights Watch.

Later that year she was put on trial again for “adultery while being married”, during which Ashtiani said she was forced to make a confession under duress.

In 2007, Iran’s Supreme Court confirmed her execution and the woman has since exhausted all her appeals. She is currently imprisoned in the city of Tabriz.

The organisation said under the country’s law, cases of adultery must be proven either by repeated confession or by the evidence of witnesses – four men or three women and two men.

However, judges are also able to use their “knowledge” to determine guilt or innocence.

Ashtiani’s lawyer has said two of the five trial judges found her not guilty – the other three ruled she was guilty based on their “knowledge”.

“Death by stoning is always cruel and inhuman, and it is especially abhorrent in cases where judges rely on their own hunches instead of evidence to proclaim a defendant guilty,” said Nadya Khalife from Human Rights Watch.

Now, if you really want to know about a stoning (and I advise against it if you either are utterly sickened by such things or made skirlingly angry and have just bought a nice new laptop) then click here.

Anyway, feel free to compare and contrast these two cases.


  1. Lynne says:

    Isn’t it about time we told the ECHR to fuck the hell off and mind their own damned business? What’s happened to Cameron’s promise to roll back ECHR legislation and his assertion that we’re “in the EU but not ruled by the EU”?

    Oh wait, he’s just anothery lying scumbag politician ain’t he…

  2. RAB says:

    The European Court of Human Rights is nothing directly to do with the EU and is not subborned by it. So we could quite happily tell them to fuck off, but we dont. We are bound by nothing but convention, not by the Lisbon Treaty or any of the others preceeding it.

    Talk about being hoist by your own petard!

    We were instrumental in setting it up in the first place. The idea was that these continental foreign johnnies could have a taste of proper British human rights and justice, seeing as they had missed out on things like the Magna carta and Habius Corpus. Wheras they would bang you up without trial as soon a look at you without trial, guilty until proven innocent etc.

    So yes we could easily tell them to fuck off, but all politicians run scared of it because they dont want to see the headlines…

    Nazi Tories/NuLab tear up your Freedom!

    In the Guardian or Mirror.

    We have enough Law to be going on with thanks, that protects our freedoms adequately without foreign judjes making it up on the hoof.

    So extradite the cunt and quickly I say. Stick two fingers up and defy them. What can they do? fine us? Will they take an IOU? Because that’s exactly what the French would do.

  3. Lynne says:

    Thanks for the distinction of how this court works, RAB. As for the Guardian or Mirror, who gives a flying fornication what they think? Any politician that runs scared of our micro-encephalic media prima donnas shouldn’t be in office. So I’ll happily accept mass Westminster resignations if you please…

    Wot, no takers?


  4. john in cheshire says:

    Since he’s already had bits chopped off him, couldn’t we sneak him over to the US bit by bit?

  5. Sunfish says:

    What’s the ECHR’s bitch? The death penalty was off of the table.

    We’re offering him three hots and a cot in climate-controlled public housing. I thought that was considered a “human right” now.

  6. NickM says:

    It’s an old Joke but Yemen wanted him (for conspiracy to murder) and we didn’t give him up because he might be tortured.

    Like they were going to cut his hands off and poke his eye out.

    The ECHR is just playing it’s usual anti-American schtick.

  7. Peter says:

    Much as I have little sympathy with Abu and friends, my main reaction on reading this piece was not to rail against the ECHR but to ask myself what the hell we should do with these absolute c-nts who stone people. Sometimes I wish China would just colonise these places – hardly the ideal solution but at least they are somewhat rational atheists that allow their populace significant private freedom. Any ideas that don’t involve sending them into space?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *