What do these human rights organizations say about the mistreatment of non-Muslims in Muslim countries? Why do they think that someone who is set against the parameters of the society in which he lives has a natural right to stay in that society? “HR Organizations Warn EU Countries Against Deportations,” from zaman.com, with thanks to Sr. Soph:
Deporting foreign national Muslims who pose a “terror threat” is becoming a wide spread policy among European governments in the wake of the London attacks.
Following France and Italy, Britain now has declared deportation of radical community leaders who follow a course of violence. Human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International (AI), however, indicate individual or collective deportations violate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). European countries, which implement that as a measure, may reportedly face many suits on the violation of rights at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Following the July 7 London attacks, many European governments announced possible deportations of those who advocated or encouraged terror. Just after the London attacks, the European Commission announced a project for the integration of radical ideological leaders back to their home countries.
The Union, however, remained reluctant to heed the Commission’s call. In July, France deported 12 Muslim clerics despite their French citizenship.
French Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy had assured at that time that they would not allow such hatred inciting clerics to confuse young Muslims” minds.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s counter-terrorism plan envisaged the listing of radical web sites, bookstores organizations and the deportation of any foreigner involved in them. Italy in turn launched an investigation into about 200 individuals in order to deport the radicals.
Union countries that implement the deportation measure run the risk of facing many suits at the ECHR and paying millions of euros in compensation. As a matter of fact, the subjection of the deported to torture and ill treatment in their home country effects the violation of the ECHR”s third clause. In the Singh Chahal case, a Sikh activist deported by British authorities, in 1996 the Court had ruled that Britain had abused the fundamental rights of the plaintiff. Human rights organizations indicate that this case will constitute an example for others to come. Organizations such as AI, HRW and Liberty react against deportations to such destinations as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Algeria where capital punishment is still in force.