Babar Ahmad seems to have lost his extradition hearing at Bow Street Magistrates Court. The Home Secretary Charles Clarke will no doubt dither a bit before making the final decision in this case.
The case is controversial becusae Ahmad is a British citizen, who is the first person being extradited to the USA under the unequal new extradition rules. The US Government does not need to present prima facie evidence before a UK court, but it does not tolerate the same unconstitutional procedure for US citizens, who the British Government might want to exradite to the UK. The US Congress has not ratified the new extradition treaty between the UK and the USA.
Since Babar Ahmad is accused of dubious terrorist fundraising activities, on the basis of what seems to be flimsy, purely electronic evidence, about alleged activities not actually in the USA , but in Afghanistan and Chechnya, one wonders why he cannot be tried here in the UK under our draconian Terrorism Act.
Babar Ahmad's lawyers have not been able to challenge any of the "evidence" against him, because it simply has not been presented in a Brirish court.
Perhaps the fact that the Home Office has still not bothered to declare either the Taleban in Afghanistan or any Chechen separatist groups as proscribed terrorist groups may have something to do with why there seems to be this "jurisdiction shopping" going on.
The very real danger is that in the current hysteria involving Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, the US government could, once they have got him in custody, declare Babar Ahmad an "enemy combatant" and pack him off to the Guantanamo Bay concentration camp, outside of the normal US judicial system, where he could face a military tribunal and the death penalty, altough he is obviously not any sort of key Al Quaeda lynchpin.
We have no sympathy for terrorists, but this case is setting entirely the wrong legal precedents, which affect the liberty of all the rest of us.