http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23937541-bomb-plotter-wins-parole-challenge.doBomb plotter wins parole challenge
1 Apr 2011
Man remanded over shop shootings
Nato probes 'airstrike on rebels'
AV 'would end MP jobs for life'
Man quizzed after schoolgirl knifed
Five killed in second Koran protest
New leak of radioactive water found
McCann parents run for charity
Policy help urged for poor parents
New arrest at Olympic park site
Severed arm found floating in lake
Sponsored links
Ads by Google
Offshore Savings Rates
Want The Highest Rates Offshore? Easily Compare The Entire Market.
www.OffshoreInvestmentDesigner.comAccess Your UK Pension
£60k-£1.8m In Pensions? Free Guide & Speak To Our Expert Advisers Now!
www.Expatra.com/QROPS/FreeGuidePersonal Security Remover
Detect and Remove Personal Security Personal Security Removal Free Scan
www.enigmasoftware.comAwareness Training
Confidently put threats in check. Corporate, Government, Private
www.escapethewolf.comA man jailed for 45 years for plotting to blow up an Israeli airliner has won a High Court challenge against Government refusals to allow his early release.
Two senior judges ruled that Nezar Hindawi, who is serving what is believed to be the longest specific jail term imposed by an English court, was subjected to a "flawed and unfair" decision-making process.
The judges quashed decisions by Justice Secretary Ken Clarke and his predecessor, Jack Straw, refusing to accept Parole Board recommendations that the Jordanian be released.
A further hearing will be held to decide whether the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, should now make a final ruling, or whether the Justice Secretary should be ordered to reconsider his decision.
Hindawi was sentenced in 1986 for attempting to destroy an El-Al plane flying from Heathrow to Tel Aviv.
He hid Semtex explosive in the luggage of his pregnant fiancee without her knowledge, but the explosives were detected and the plot was foiled - avoiding a potential loss of 375 lives.
The case for rejecting parole was drafted principally by the official who had had day-to-day conduct of the case in front of a parole board hearing which the Government lost. The Secretary of State was therefore not put in a position where he could properly take the decision, said the judge.
"That is contrary to principles of justice that our law has always applied in cases however heinous a crime might be.
"A consequence of the unfair procedure was that the decision made by the Secretary of State was flawed, principally because it did not set out proper reasons for rejecting the finding that the claimant was a credible witness, which the Parole Board made after hearing his evidence.
"His decision must therefore be quashed."