A British court insisted that nine hijackers from Afghanistan should receive asylum rather than deportation for their takeover of a flight in order to escape the Taliban. The High Court even penalized the Home Office for its insistence on prosecuting the deportation:

Nine Afghan asylum seekers who hijacked a plane at gunpoint to get to Britain should have been admitted to the country as genuine refugees and allowed to live and work here freely, the High Court ruled yesterday.

In a decision that astonished and dismayed MPs, the Home Office was accused of abusing its powers by failing to give the nine formal permission to enter Britain, in breach of their human rights. ...

The judge ordered the Home Office to pay legal costs on an indemnity basis - the highest level possible - to signify his "disquiet and concern".

So far, the whole affair, including legal fees, asylum processing and benefits for the families, has cost the taxpayer an estimated £20 million to £30 million.

That which a society rewards will increase accordingly. If the British reward people who hijack airliners for their political purposes, then they will transform themselves into a favored landing spot for hijackers. The court fails to recognize that the regime the men fled has been toppled -- through the efforts of British troops, among others -- and that deportation does not carry the risks it may have earlier.

One cannot reward terrorism and criminality, even when the cause evokes such sympathy. Otherwise, nations move from the rule of law to the rule of whim -- with very dangerous results.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is