Human Rights Madness

Bankers, like taxpersons do not naturaly attract much sympathy, particularly from the business community. However the strory of the so-called 'NatWest Three' could perhaps maybe possibly be concidered as a case for some sympathy.

.

The three bankers are accused of a minor role in the Enron scandal, who are on course to be extradited to Texas, where they face two years in jail awaiting trial.

.

If found guilty, the three could be incarcerated for up to 25 years. In the US, convicts who get more than six years are automatically sent to maximum security prisons, such as Sing Sing - a sinister twist on facing the music.

.

The trio, David Bermingham, Gary Mulgrew and Giles Derby, are alleged to have diddled NatWest out of £4.5m via some underhand trading of the bank's stake in an Enron subsidiary. They strongly deny any wrongdoing and are fighting an extradition order made by a district judge, which was upheld by Charles Clarke, when he was Home Secretary.

.

Given that Clarke's department allowed (albeit unwittingly) more than 1,000 convicted foreign criminals, including murderers and rapists, to be released into British society, instead of being deported, you can see why the 'NatWest Three' are feeling a tad peeved.

.

But wait, it gets worse; much worse. For while the release of foreign criminals was a Home Office error, there is no mistaking the protection that Britain's legal system is giving to some truly ghastly people who shouldn't be here.For instance, we've failed to instantly get rid of Abu Qatada, a Muslim cleric with suspected links to al-Qa'eda. His deportation to Jordan, where he has been convicted of terrorism offences, was opposed by lawyers on the grounds that this delicate flower may have his petals ruffled in Amman.

.

British taxpayers were not only protecting Qatada's "human rights" but also funding them.Then there's the barely believable case of the nine Afghan hijackers, who were recently told by a High Court judge that they could continue to live in Britain (on benefits, naturally) because sending them back to Afghanistan would be "unsafe".

.

Sickest of all is the story of Mustaf Jama, a Somalian refugee, who is wanted in connection with the murder of PC Sharon Beshenivsky in Bradford. He escaped deportation just months before the policewoman was shot, despite being a persistent offender who had served several terms in prison.

The Home Office said Jama avoided repatriation because Somalia was "dangerous". Really? So does that mean anyone from an African hell-hole who arrives in Britain, irrespective of circumstances, can never be returned? I guess it does.

.

No such protection, however, for three British citizens, born and bred in the United Kingdom, accused of small-time swindling, even though neither their former employer, NatWest, nor

the Serious Fraud Office in London is pursuing legal action against them.

.

Ones suspicion that Sing Sing Jail is that it's filled with inmates who make Mike Tyson seem like Pansy Potter. Pretty "dangerous", one could say. So why do the 'NatWest Three' face the possibility of being banged up there, or some place like it?

.

Let's be clear, the human rights industry in this country is no longer protecting us, it's a threat to our safety, like a guard-dog that's savaging its master.

.

The acid of political correctness has burnt a hole in our administration's collective brain; it's unable to think straight. As a result, the British Parliament has lost control of the most important rules and regulations by which the vast majority of its citizens wish to be governed.

.

A combination of warped do-gooders, barmy domestic judges and insidious European institutions are destroying the fabric of our society. Even the prime minister - whose lawyer wife is a member of the human rights mafia - called the court's decision to block the deportation of the Afghans "an abuse of common sense".

.

Yet it was on Tony Blair's watch that Britain was panicked into signing a new extradition treaty with the US, after the 9/11 atrocities, in order to clamp down on terrorists. It was an agreement that was meant to be used against bombers, not bankers.

.

Instead, it has cleared the way for US prosecutors to remove British citizens, including those accused of white-collar offences, even though the UK has no reciprocal rights over Americans.

.

We have no idea if the NatWest Three are guilty. Perhaps they are. But not even their enemies (mostly small business people) would describe them as a threat to British security.

.

By contrast, many foreign nationals, who have taken refuge here amidst the thick fog of constitutional confusion, most definitely are. We've given up our human rights for theirs. Traditional very British fairness has been replaced by utter madness.