This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/19/judge-rules-terror-suspect-tpim-tag-removed-mental-health-concern

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Terror suspect's tag to be removed over mental health concerns, judge rules Terror suspect's tag to be removed over mental health concerns, judge rules
(about 1 hour later)
The high court has ordered the removal of a terror suspect’s monitoring tag because of a deterioration in his mental health and his delusional belief that the device contains a bomb.The high court has ordered the removal of a terror suspect’s monitoring tag because of a deterioration in his mental health and his delusional belief that the device contains a bomb.
The suspect, referred to as DD, an imam suspected of radicalising young people and making a powerful contribution to an Islamic terror group’s media campaign, is subject to a terrorism prevention and investigation measures order (Tpim) that includes tagging. The suspect, referred to as DD, an imam suspected of radicalising young people and making a powerful contribution to an terror group’s media campaign, is subject to a terrorism prevention and investigation measures order (Tpim) that includes tagging.
Lawyers for the home secretary, Theresa May, told the court there was evidence that the Somali refugee, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had for many years provided important support for al-Shabaab, including recruiting “young and vulnerable individuals from Europe”.Lawyers for the home secretary, Theresa May, told the court there was evidence that the Somali refugee, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had for many years provided important support for al-Shabaab, including recruiting “young and vulnerable individuals from Europe”.
But Mr Justice Collins, sitting in London, ruled that requiring the 39-year-old to continue wearing the ankle tag – slightly larger than a sports watch – now breached his human rights because his mental illness and delusional thoughts had grown worse. But Mr Justice Collins, sitting in London, ruled that requiring the 39-year-old to continue wearing the ankle tag – slightly larger than a sports watch – breached his human rights because his mental illness and delusional thoughts had got worse.
There was medical evidence that DD had psychotic and unusual beliefs that the tag was there to punish him, said the judge. He believed it contained a camera and a bomb and voices and noises emanated from it. There was medical evidence that DD had psychotic and unusual beliefs that the tag was there to punish him, Collins said. He believed it contained a camera and a bomb and that noises and voices emanated from it.
Two doctors had accepted that DD was not exaggerating his symptoms. There was no doubt that the tag might produce a further deterioration and result in serious self-harm, said the judge. Two doctors had accepted that DD was not exaggerating his symptoms. There was no doubt that the tag might produce a further deterioration and result in serious self-harm, the judge said.
Requiring him to continue wearing the tag was a breach of Article 3 of the European convention on human rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment. Requiring him to continue wearing the tag was a breach of article three of the European convention on human rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment.
The judge warned: “Since the appellant has the delusion that there is a bomb in his tag which will be detonated so that MI5 can kill him if a judge allows his appeal, great care should be taken with the removal of the tag. The judge said: “Since the appellant has the delusion that there is a bomb in his tag which will be detonated so that MI5 can kill him if a judge allows his appeal, great care should be taken with the removal of the tag.
“It may be considered sensible not to inform him of my decision that the tag must go until on some pretext the tag has been removed.”“It may be considered sensible not to inform him of my decision that the tag must go until on some pretext the tag has been removed.”
But the judge refused to lift the Tpim itself, saying the decision to maintain it was not legally flawed. Collins refused to lift the Tpim itself, saying the decision to maintain it was not legally flawed.