"Jailing a “very dangerous” asylum seeker who sexually assaulted a teenager could breach his human rights, a court heard."
Telegraph: 19th February 2025: Continuing its excellent work exposing bizarre judicial decisions, the Telegraph's latest report is one of the most harrowing yet.
"Hassan Abou Hayleh, 39, attacked the 19 year-old after driving around at 3am looking for vulnerable drunk women. He was due to be sentenced on Monday at Bournemouth Crown Court, but the hearing was adjourned after his defence barrister argued that sending him to prison might breach his human rights.
The Syrian immigrant was found guilty of sexual assault in a trial last November. Following his conviction, Judge Pawson, told him: “On the evidence before me you are potentially a very dangerous man. I shudder to think what might have happened.” [Read full account of events here]. After hearing the defence lawyers argument, Judge Pawson... adjourned sentencing for further assessment of Hayleh.
Chris Philp, shadow home secretary, said:
“It is outrageous that ECHR considerations are potentially preventing a dangerous sexual predator from being jailed. No consideration seems to have been given to the danger he poses to women and girls and the need to protect them. The legal system should protect innocent people from dangerous attackers and not prioritise the supposed rights of illegal immigrants who, in this case, is also a dangerous sexual predator. With each one of these cases, which The Telegraph uncovers, the case for fundamental reform of these increasingly absurd human rights laws become stronger.”
Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary said:
“This disgusting man is a danger to women and girls. He should be behind bars and deported, never to return. The right of the British public to live in safety obviously trumps this man’s mental health claims. This shouldn’t even be a debate and it’s disturbing a judge would even entertain it.”
Marco Longhi, a former Conservative MP, who has now joined Reform, said:
“Judges must be held accountable for their decisions, especially when they prioritise offenders’ rights over the safety of the public. In cases like this, where a dangerous individual has been convicted of sexual assault, the rights of victims and potential future victims should take precedence. The idea that a convicted offender’s PTSD could exempt them from prison is deeply troubling and undermines justice. As long as the UK remains bound by the European Convention on Human Rights, judges will continue to apply subjective and left-leaning interpretations of this contested notion international law. Parliament is Sovereign and our laws should apply."