Pakistani jihadist who plotted to carry out 7/7 bombings in Birmingham wants to be deported – but Home Office refuse over ‘human rights concerns’

A Pakistani jihadist cannot be deported despite renouncing his British citizenship because it would breach his human rights, official papers suggest. 

Irfan Khalid was one of the leaders of a gang who plotted to carry out a 7/7-style mass terror attack in Birmingham and turn the city into a ‘little war zone’. 

The conspiracy was smashed during Britain’s biggest anti-terror investigation, with Khalid sentenced to 18 years in prison in 2013. 

Last year, the Parole Board deemed him too dangerous to be released. Some of the documents relating to his case have now been made public.  

One shows the Home Office has been unable to deport Khalid despite him wanting to return to Pakistan. 

The document suggests deporting the terrorist would ‘breach his human rights’, according to The Telegraph. 

‘Mr Khalid is a foreign national of Pakistan,’ it reads. 

‘He has renounced his British citizenship. He is subject to a deportation order, which was not enforceable due to human rights concerns.’

Irfan Khalid was one of the leaders of a gang who plotted to carry out a 7/7-style mass terror attack in Birmingham and turn the city into a ‘little war zone’

The Parole Board writes that Khalid had even ‘signed a letter of disclaimer facilitating him being voluntarily returned to Pakistan’.

Officials also detail the reason for their decision not to allow Khalid to be released from prison. 

‘The panel examined the UK release plan provided by Mr Khalid’s probation officer and weighed its proposals against assessed risks,’ the document continues. 

‘After considering the circumstances of his offending, the progress made while in custody and the evidence presented at the hearing, the panel was not satisfied that release at this point would be safe for the protection of the public.

‘He will be eligible for another parole review in due course.’

Khalid and other members of his terror gang, including Ashik Ali and Irfan Naseer, planned to set off up to eight bombs in rucksacks, using timers to detonate the charges.

The plot was foiled in September 2011, when undercover police raided the cell amid fears the terrorist attack was imminent.

Detectives said it was the most significant to be foiled since a 2006 conspiracy to blow up transatlantic airliners using bombs disguised as soft drinks.

Irfan Khalid pictured arriving at Birmingham airport with his co-conspirator, Irfan Naseer 

Their trial judge Mr Justice Henriques said the plot ‘had the blessing of al-Qaeda’ and with the intention to ‘further the aims of al-Qaeda’.

He told the defendants when sentencing them: ‘You were seeking to recruit a team of somewhere between six and eight suicide bombers to carry out a spectacular bombing campaign, one which would create an anniversary along the lines of 7/7 or 9/11.

‘It’s clear that you were planning a terrorist outrage in Birmingham.’

Khalid had boasted the attack would be ‘another 9/11’, while Ali told police he would have donned a suicide vest and shot soldiers.

The Home Office and Parole Board declined to comment. 

His case is only the latest in a series of controversial decisions relating to attempts to deport criminals from the UK. 

This includes an illegal migrant from Iraq who avoided deportation after claiming he had lost his phone and identity documents.

The man, who allegedly left Iraq while facing arrest for exam fraud, claimed an ‘agent’ had thrown away his ID and phone, meaning he would not be able to get in touch with family members if deported.

Irfan Khalid with Irfan Naseer and Rahin Ahmed carrying out a bogus charity collection to fund the attack

Speaking at an immigration tribunal where he was granted anonymity, the man reportedly said he could not remember his family’s phone numbers, which would prevent him from getting help to replace his identity cards and return to Iraq.

He had been allegedly threatened with arrest in Iraq before fleeing to the UK after being caught delivering test papers to students before they sat an exam.

He went on to have his appeal to remain in the UK accepted by the Home Office even though there were ‘inconsistencies’ in his story. 

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk