The good news for those of us living in the London Metropolitan area is that someone famous is moving in. The bad news is that this person was once considered Osama Bin Laden’s right hand man. Radical Islamist cleric Abu Qatada is on the verge of being released from Long Latin maximum security prison in Worcestershire, England.

Upon Qatada’s release, he will be taken to an address in London – presumably at the tax payer’s expense – where he will live with his family. Granted he will be living under constant surveillance, a 22-hour daily curfew, with massive restrictions put on the activities he is allowed to participate in during his 2 hours of ‘freedom;’ but one assumes that this is a veritable 5-Star vacation compared to living in a maximum security prison.

This may be considered yet another instance in which the massive differences between the respective political climates of American and Europe are brought to the fore. In America, we enter Pakistan (arguably illegally) and gun down our enemy (bin Laden) in cold blood, while in Europe they set them free and let them live with relative freedom in one of the greatest cities in the world, London.

Without judging which one is better, it seems plain that there is something undeniably irksome about returning Qatada – so influential a member of al-Qaeda and arguably the spiritual inspiration behind the 9/11 bombings (with nearly 20 of his sermon’s found at the home 9/11 ring leader Mohamed Atta) to the comfort of his family.

Thankfully, Britain is massively troubled by the implications and the reality of having their hand forced to release Qatada.

Britain was set to deport Qatada back to his native Jordon, where he was sentenced in absentia to life in prison in 1999 for plotting a series of terrorist attacks. Qatada however, appealed his deportation with the Europe Union body the European Court of Human Rights, who ruled that deportation to Jordan would subjugate the extremist cleric to an unfair trial based on evidence acquired through torture. In the words of the European judges, deporting Qatada would lead to a ‘flagrant denial of justice.’

Should this have happened, one assumes that very few Americans would have shed a tear for Qatada, and certainly few Britains would care very little if the his trial were a sham, so long has the verdict were ‘guilty.’

However, as some have argued, the unfortunate side of ‘freedom’ is that it is an unbiased ideal – that in order to have a society like Britain and American were we enjoy a plethora of freedoms and privileges, justice and fairness must be shown both to those who are deserving and those who are not. Yet, something tells me that for many this is a difficult pill to swallow.

Due to the ruling, Qatada’s release from prison – albeit temporary in theory – is imminent. The conditions for his bail were negotiated last week between the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Home Office, which will be finalized this week.

Thankfully, Qatada’s return to London is not considered a long-term prospect by the UK government. Home Office minister James Brokenshire will be in Jordon this week to attain a guarantee from Jordan that Qatada will receive a fair trial in the event of his return. Prime Minister David Cameron has even spoken directly to the King of Jordan to find a solution to clear the way for the charismatic preacher’s deportation.

Cameron’s spokesperson said, “They agreed on the importance of finding an effective solution to this case, in the interests of both Britain and Jordan.”

Danger on the Loose

Qatada’s bail was issued with the expressed knowledge by the British government that they were dealing with a man – once declared by a Spanish judge as ‘Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe’ – that still poses a very tangible threat to the UK’s national security.

The details of Qatada’s bail are expected to include a 22-hour curfew enforced by an electronic tag. This is 6 hours longer than the 16 hour limit allowed by a British terrorism control order, thus putting Qatada under the UK’s most draconian bail conditions possible. He will also have massive restrictions on his telephone and internet access.

Qatada’s 2 hours of freedom – broken into 2 separate hour-long slots – will be restricted to a limited geographical area and under tight surveillance.

Theresa May, the UK’s Home Secretary, told Parliament last week that Qatada will not be given the same privileges of his previous UK bail in 2007 that included taking his children to and from school. He will also be banned from leading prayer at any UK mosque.

British courts have given the Home Office a maximum of three months to make ‘demonstrable progress’ on securing Qatada’s passage to Jordan. Indeed, failure to do so will result in Qatada’s strict bail measures being relaxed and possibly eventually abolished all together if no realistic solution is achieved.

Qatada was first charged under anti-terrorism legislation in October 2002. Since then he has spent a 9-year period in either prison or under house arrest.

Why Release Abu Qatada?

Simply put, the UK has no choice but to release Abu Qatada, who can safely be earmarked as one of the world’s most influential and dangerous terrorists.

The unfortunate truth is that he has not been charged or convicted of a criminal offence. Therefore – by the letter of the law – he is legally entitled to the liberty of any normal person who is thoroughly and completely un-involved in terrorism.

In fact, the reason he has been in prison so long is technically due to immigration control. However, there is a legal precedent in Britain that using immigration as a measure to address a security problem is an issue of discrimination as it treats non-UK terrorist suspects more harshly than terrorist suspects who have British passports.

In the event Qatada is not shipped to Jordan, he will join the long list of individuals in this country who are under constant surveillance by the police and intelligence services, a costly and tedious affair, one assumes. Prison also bears massive costs implications, however at least this option comes with the guarantee that the culprit will be locked away in a cell.

Indeed the longer Qatada is out of prison, the sooner he will be almost completely free to do as he wishes, a very worrying prospect. Further, one assumes that Qatada will find it difficult to find a job given his history with terrorism – therefore he will likely eventually receive benefits (i.e. welfare) paid by the taxpayer.

This sounds about as insane and un-American as it gets as clearly liberty is a privilege Qatada does not deserve. However, as the U.S. Supreme Court stated in its 1950 ruling in U.S. v. Rabinowitz, “The safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people.”

Therefore, if the UK’s hand is being forced to let a terrorist par excellence walk among normal society, it is due to a devotion to liberty and rule of law. Indeed, we could come up with a system that puts people like Qatada behind bars without due process in court, however that world would be a frightening place to experience.