The Queen personally intervened to ask why the British authorities had not arrested Abu Hamza, the radical cleric, it was claimed today. She was so “upset” about the Islamist extremist being allowed to preach his message of hate in the UK that she asked a former Home Secretary to explain why he was still at large, the BBC’s respected security correspondent Frank Gardner said.
Hamza and four other terrorism suspects are facing extradition to America within days after they had their case against removal from Britain thrown out by the European Court of Human Rights yesterday.
Mr Gardner revealed today that the Queen told him of her frustration at Hamza remaining at liberty in Britain before he was charged with offences under the Terrorism Act in October 2004.
“The Queen was pretty upset that there was no way to arrest him. She couldn’t understand – surely there must be some law that he broke,” the BBC correspondent told Radio 4’s Today programme.
“Well, sure enough there was. He was eventually convicted and sentenced to seven years for soliciting murder and racial hatred.”Mr Gardner added: “She spoke to the Home Secretary at the time and said, ‘surely this man must have broken some laws, my goodness, why is he still at large?’
“Because he was conducting these radical activities, he called Britain a toilet, he was incredibly anti-British, and yet he was sucking up money from this country for a long time. He was a huge embarrassment to Muslims, who condemned him.”
Asked how he knew about the Queen’s views on Hamza, Mr Gardner said simply: “She told me.”
Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
Yesterday’s ruling by a panel of five judges at the European Court of Human Rights means there is now no other barrier to deporting Hamza and the others and they could be on a plane within a matter of days.
It brings to an end a series of long legal battles by the terror suspects which has cost the taxpayer more than £4 million in detention and legal bills.
One of the cases had has been running for more than 13 years and Hamza’s extradition fight has run since 2004.
The Home Office last night pledged to remove Hamza and the others “as quickly as possible”.
The ECHR first ruled in April this year that Hamza and the others could be deported to America because prisons there are more comfortable than those in Europe.
In the landmark judgment, the court concluded that extradition to the US would not lead to inhuman treatment.
It unanimously dismissed claims that conditions in American “supermax” jails were degrading, instead ruling that facilities such as televisions, telephones and arts and crafts actually “went beyond” what was provided in most European prisons.
The five suspects applied to have their cases appealed at the Grand Chamber but a panel yesterday rejected those applications.
Earlier this year the retired British businessman Christopher Tappin was extradited to the US within two weeks of losing his final appeal bid.
Hamza, who lost both hands and an eye fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, is charged in the US with 11 counts relating to the taking of 16 hostages in Yemen in 1998, advocating jihad in Afghanistan in 2001 and conspiring to establish a jihad training camp in Bly, Oregon in 2000–2001.
The American authorities first requested his extradition in 2004 but the process was almost immediately put on hold when Hamza was charged in the UK with 15 offences under the Terrorism Act, temporarily staying the US extradition process.
In 2006 he was found guilty on 11 charges, including inciting murder and race hate, and was jailed for seven years.
Also facing deportation are Babar Ahmad and Syed Talha Ahsan, who are accused of offences including providing support to terrorists and conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim or injure.
Adel Abdul Bary and Khaled al – Fawwaz were originally indicted for their alleged involvement in, or support for, the bombing of US embassies in East Africa in 1998.
Al – Fawwaz faces more than 269 counts of murder.
Following deportation, the suspects will be held in supermax prisons, the most secure custody in the US, although it is likely that Hamza will be exempted because of his medical condition.
The men argued that conditions in jails, and their possible sentences of life without parole, breached Article 3 of the European Convention, which protects against ill treatment and torture.
The April ruling, after a series of controversial human rights judgments against the Government, was welcomed by Prime Minister David Cameron.
Speaking at the time, former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said the decision would “do a great deal to restore the reputation of the court”, adding: “Perhaps now we can have a rational debate about the role and significance of the European Convention and its fundamental importance to a democratic society like our own.”
A Home Office spokesman said: “The Home Secretary welcomes today’s decision not to refer the cases of Abu Hamza and four others to the Grand Chamber.
“This follows the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on 10 April to allow the extradition of these five terrorism suspects to the US. “We will work to ensure that the individuals are handed over to the US authorities as quickly as possible.”