So Whose Rights Are We Protecting Then?

An article in yesterdays Yorkshire Post caught my attention. The headline said….

“Iraqi who stabbed doctors can stay in Britain.”

The article went on to tell the story of paranoid schizophrenic, Laith Alani, who has been imprisoned for nineteen years after he stabbed to death consultant cosmetic surgeons Michael Masser and Kenneth Paton.

The Immigration Office wanted to deport him to Iraq on his release, but the immigration tribunal decided that such a move would breach his human rights and put people in the Middle Eastern country at risk!

Alani, who told the police he carried out the attack because he had received a “command from Allah”, could be set free next year.
A statement from the judgement reads as follows….

If his present treatment were to be discontinued, as seems to be most likely the case if he were to be removed to Iraq, the potential consequences could be extremely serious for Alani himself, and potentially life threatening for innocent third parties around him, in the event of his likely, indeed almost inevitable, relapse into a state of paranoid schizrophenia.

Let’s just have a look at some of the wording in the [previous paragraph.

If it were to be – no certainty that it would be discontinued in Iraq.
Potential consequences could be extremely serious – no certainty here – potential meaning possible.
In the event of – no certainty here either.

So we have a judgement protecting the human rights of a murderer based on maybe’s and possibilities, and as a result of this, we, the British taxpayers are left to pick up the bill and live with the possibility of re offence

So what about the rights of the British Public then?