Post by Focus on Feb 25, 2013 20:14:16 GMT
The family of radical preacher Abu Qatada has won an injunction preventing protesters from demonstrating outside their home.
His wife and five children were granted an 'anti-harassment' order by a High Court judge in London.
Mr Justice Silber also granted them an injunction against various protest groups preventing them misusing private information about the family - such as their names and address.
Court case : The family of Abu Qatada, pictured, have won an injunction preventing protesters from staging demonstrations within 500 metres of their London home
The judge stressed that his decision did not prevent organisations from protesting against Qatada, provided demonstrations take place more than 500 metres from the London house where they are living.
The judge pointed out that Qatada, whose real name is Omar Othman, was not a party to the proceedings.
He emphasised that the case was not concerned with whether 'Omar Othman should still be in this country or whether he should be in prison in this country'.
Judge Silber also said he was not concerned with whether he or his family 'should be provided with a house financed by the United Kingdom taxpayers'.
It was accepted 'that it is perfectly legitimate' for there to be protests about his presence in the country and about the house provided to his family.
The injunctions granted today continued earlier orders made by another High Court judge earlier this month.
The court action for injunctions was brought against a number of groups, including English National Resistance, Britain First and the English Defence League, as well as against 'persons unknown who are intending to assemble outside the home' of the claimants.
He said evidence showed that the claimants, including two children under the age of 16, 'have suffered extreme distress and upset by the actions of demonstrators outside their home'.
He added that such protests directly outside had 'terrified' the family, particularly the younger children.
Court hearing : The High Court ruling upheld an earlier court decision and rejected an appeal from a number of groups including the English Defence League and Britain First
The judge said he accepted the evidence presented on their behalf that, while demonstrations were taking place, they were 'effectively prisoners in their own home'.
Justice Silber added that defendants aimed 'to cause as much misery, not only to Omar Othman, but also to his family'.
He added there was 'powerful evidence' from the claimants of weekly demonstrations 'with much shouting of abuse' such as 'Abu Qatada off our streets', 'All Muslims are terrorists' and 'Just murder him' - with chanting and shouting lasting for up to six hours.
In opposing the injunctions, the defendants argued that the orders would interfere with their rights under the European Convention on Human rights - in relation to freedom of thought, expression, and of assembly and association.
Rejecting their case, the judge pointed out that each of those rights 'is qualified in the sense that they do not apply in certain circumstances such as where they interfere with the rights of others'.
As well as the 'anti-harassment' order, he granted a second injunction restraining the defendants from communicating or disclosing personal matters relating to the wife and children, such as their address, names, names of schools, and also images of them.
The injunction were brought against a number of groups including the English Defence League the English National Resistance and Britain First (stock image)
Their case was that if the defendants were allowed to communicate such information it was likely to result in further harassment.
A previous court order already prohibited the release of Qatada’s address into the public domain.
Last year, Siac judges ruled that evidence from Qatada’s former co-defendants, Abu Hawsher and Al-Hamasher, said to have been obtained by torture, could be used against him in a retrial.
They said: 'The Secretary of State has not satisfied us that, on a retrial, there is no real risk that the impugned statements of Abu Hawsher and Al-Hamasher would be admitted probatively against the appellant.'
Mrs May immediately pledged to appeal and told the Commons that Jordan had given assurances about its legal processes.
She described Qatada as 'a dangerous man, a suspected terrorist, who is accused of serious crime in his home country of Jordan'.
Qatada was granted bail following the ruling and released from HMP Long Lartin. Mrs May’s appeal against a decision to allow Qatada to stay in the UK is due to be heard on March 11.
Home Secretary Theresa May is appealing against a decision to allow Abu Qatada to remain in the UK
He has fought deportation to Jordan - where he was convicted of terror charges in his absence in 1999 - for more than a decade -- Now they're having a fcking laugh! ... 'harassment'? -- why was this even allowed to go court?? ... have this b--tard's victims received any compensation for his acts of terrorism? no they haven't!!! -- one more question ... why is this murdering fcktard still residing in this country??
Fx 
