On 17 January, the European Court of Human rights ruled that the UK must refrain from deporting the radical Islamist cleric Abu Qatada to Jordan. The judges ruled that a deportation would amount to a violation of the right to fair trial (article 6 ECHR), as there is a real risk that at his retrial in Jordan evidence obtained under torture would be admitted before the courts. However, the judges accepted the diplomatic assurances given from Jordan to the UK, and thus found no violation of the non-refoulement principle (articles 3 and 5 ECHR). The decision of the Court is not final and the UK Government has stated to consider all available legal options. While the halt of the deportation has been welcomed by human rights groups, they have strongly criticised the de facto acceptance of diplomatic assurances in deportation cases. Julia Hall of Amnesty International stated: "This is an alarming setback for human rights. Diplomatic assurances are no substitute for respect for the legal obligation not to send a person to a place where they are at real risk of torture." In the past, human rights organisations as well as UN experts, such as the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, have warned that diplomatic assurances would circumvent the prohibition of torture.