Thursday, December 16, 2010

Iraqi Kurd Aso Mohammed Ibrahim left a little girl to die under the wheels of a car, he isn’t getting deported, Human Rights needs revamped

Dear All

An asylum-seeker who left a girl dying under the wheels of his car when he fled the scene can stay in the UK.

Yes, two immigration judges have issued this ruling.

And they did so using Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998.Article 8 gives a person the right to a family life.

The Human Rights Act comes in for a lot of abuse because of the people who interrupt what the act means.

And on occasion they get it spectacularly wrong which the press then seize on.

Regardless of the nationality what kind of person abandons a seriously injured child to their fate?

Iraqi Kurd Aso Mohammed Ibrahim, a complete scumbag.

He was only jailed for four months after knocking down Amy Houston in Blackburn in 2003.

Four months isn’t justice by any means.

Paul Houston, father of Amy said:

"The Human Rights Act is for everybody, not just asylum-seekers and terrorists”.

And that is the problem, the State should have stepped in an exercised its veto.

As much as human rights concern the rights of the individual, it also mentions the rights of the State.

Let us look at Article 8 of the European Convention.


1/ Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2/There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

We lock people up in this country when they commit serious crimes, prisoners cannot invoke Article 8 and the State takes away this right because of conviction.

During internment a prisoner is denied the right to a family life.

Aso Mohammed Ibrahim should be deported but he has used the fact that he met a British woman and they had two children, Harry, four, and Zara, three to circumvent the system in his favour.

He effectively uses the human rights of his wife and children to strengthen his case to stay.

This is wrong: as much as Paul Houston cannot use his human rights to have Ibrahim deported neither should Ibrahim’s children be considered as mechanism for him to stay.

I blogged on this concept before after Tam Baillie, Scottish Children’s Commissioner mooted that Judges should take into account whether a person had children before considering sentence.

Baillie was using a ruling made by South Africa Judge Abie Sachs who didn’t jail a woman because she had children.

Sachs wasn’t going on rule of law rather than subjective opinion; he was making it up as he was going along.

Wrongly in my opinion!

At the time I said;

‘If you break the law then you cannot use the human rights of others in order to circumvent justice. That isn’t then a human right, as “rights” are specific to the individual in the Court’.

Paul Houston is right to campaign to get Ibrahim deported but as good as the Human Rights Act is, the problem is the wrong people sit making judgments using it.

Mr Houston said:

"What are the judges saying here? They are saying it doesn't matter what you do when you come here, who you kill, what laws you break, as long as you have a child here you can stay?"


"You work hard, play by the rules, pay your taxes and this is how you get treated. What does that say about politicians, our leaders and the legal system? It's a joke."

"The Human Rights Act is for everybody, not just asylum-seekers and terrorists”.
"How can he say he's deprived of his right to a family life? The only person deprived of a family life is me. Amy was my only family."

"They are obsessed with the rights of others from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. Where are my human rights?"

Paul Houston ‘rights’ don’t exist because when the Convention on Human Rights was drawn up it wasn’t as extensive as it should have been.

His ‘rights’ were passed to the State, who using Article 8.2 should have been able to deport Iraqi Kurd Aso Mohammed Ibrahim back to Iraq.

Paul Houston and his family have been failed by society because Britain is a corrupt society.

Just as I have blogged on continually, these perverse decisions that support my claim that the political and social elite don't represent ordinary working class people.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University


jacobcobb said...

This makes me absolutley sick.
It gives the green light for illegal immigrants to commit murder and stay here.

Anonymous said...

Wasn't Posh Boy Dave only yesterday telling the 1922 committee that foreign criminals should be sent home...

Does this idiot just open his stupid mouth and say whatever he thinks will please his audience du jour?

Anonymous said...

Such a sad case, If I were her father, despite my beliefs I would have to hunt him down. The Law has failed this poor man.

Once again the only winners are this scumbags lawyers( they must be so proud at their victory) and the scumbag himself.

If Asylum seekers can evade detection for long enough and claim to have a life here then they are in.

My heart goes out to Mr Houstons family RIP Amy.

Anonymous said...

Just because this evil scum bread children in this country should not give him the automatic right to remain in this country indefinate. This is a loop hole that many immigrants are doing and by getting indigenious woman pregnant in this country this is the way the can claim to remain here.
This immigration policy is a toatl shambles and too many loop holes.
The goverment, including the Scottish Goverment should be doing more to ensure immigrants that commit crimes in this country are deported as soon as convicted and save us taxpayers having to fork out for the luxurious that priosn in this country offer. Send them back to serve their sentence in their own country from where they came and see how they like their own laws. They dont abide by ours so we should show them no mercy by allowing them to remain in our country.

Danyell said...

So who’s popping champagne corks tonight over this abomination of justice? Well apart from the low life and his immediate family, the looney political correct and his now filthy rich legal team I should think no one with a single ounce of any morals. I suppose the guy must think he’s now invincible, 3 months for murder and a lifetime on state hand outs and benefits. Whatever on earth has brought this once great nation to snivelling on its knees like this while the worlds criminals queue in Calais to join the gravy train that is our welfare state. He should have been deported seven years ago after his first offence, being sheltered here in the UK as an asylum seeker should be seen as a privilege not a right. One strike and out should be the rule.

Anonymous said...

Im a kurd my self and i think he should be sent back kurdistan in my opinion because she left the poor girl after hitting her with the car , this is a DISGRACE !!R.I.P poor little girl. Good luck 2 her family aswell.

Anonymous said...

Im a kurd my self and i think he should be sent back kurdistan in my opinion because he left the poor girl after hitting her with the car , this is a DISGRACE !!R.I.P poor little girl. Good luck 2 her family aswell.

Anonymous said...


Ibrahim was not only guilty of this heinous crime but also had criminal convictions for driving while disqualified and without insurance, possession of cannabis and had cautions for criminal damage and burglary and theft.
The Iraqi Kurd was due to be deported after his application for asylum was refused.
In 2006 - three years after the fatal crash - he was again convicted of driving whilst disqualified and without insurance.
In 2009 he was also convicted of harassment, damage to property and theft.

What about justice for Paul Houston’s daughter Amy. Surely both Mr Houston and Amy have ‘Human Rights’, or is that ONLY reserved for failed asylum seekers???
Matthew Barnes, for the UKBA (Border Agency), said Ibrahim had shown "contempt to the laws of the UK".
He added: "The appellant [Ibrahim] has spent his time here repeatedly committing a variety of criminal offences, some of which has led to imprisonment." You have seen his catalogue of crimes, what possible benefit does this man have being in this country???

Perhaps a more appropriate justice could be to publish Ibrahim’s address in the newspapers and let the public decide the appropriate remedies.