“I would wish to see removed from this country all those on the plane as soon as reasonably practicable,” he told MPs. The Home Secretary added: “As a matter of public policy, I believe that the clearest and unequivocal signals must be sent out so as to discourage hijacking, whatever its motive.”To fast-track their asylum applications Mr Straw is taking exceptional powers to decide personally on each of the cases. He wants to clear them by early next week, and said that he would be using article F1 of the Chicago convention against hijacking, which excludes rights to asylum for those involved in criminal acts. He said those responsible for the hijacking should serve 10 years in jail.But Mr Straw’s personal intervention was condemned by human-rights groups, which gave a warning that he may be sending back the hostages to possible imprisonment, torture and death. Any decisions on asylum are likely to face legal challenges, meaning that the Kampuchean Airlines Tristar jet could be waiting on the Tarmac at Stansted for some time.Adding to the confusion last night was the disclosure by police officers that some passengers – previously unsuspected – had come forward to claim that they too were part of the plot to take over the plane.

Detectives are exploring whether the “confessions” are being prompted by the belief that they should lead to a better chance of being granted asylum in this country.In recent cases those convicted of hijacking have been allowed to stay in Britain after serving their sentences, which have been comparatively short.The theory that the entire “hijacking” was an elaborate plot to gain asylum has been fuelled by news that up to 40 of the passengers were related to the men who took over the plane.There was also concern expressed by senior officers in Essex over the Home Secretary’s intervention.They pointed out that many of the passengers were expected to play a part as witnesses, or even possible suspects, at any future criminal trial and that Mr Straw’s action could be viewed as political interference in the judicial process.In the course of the prolonged negotiations which led to the settlement of the crisis the Afghans had been reassured by Hope Hanlan, the British representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, that they would receive fair treatment under British law.. Labour backbenchers yesterday challenged Jack Straw’s tough stance on the asylum seekers from the Stansted hijack plane, warning they could face “death and torture” if they were sent back to Afghanistan. Labour backbenchers yesterday challenged Jack Straw’s tough stance on the asylum seekers from the Stansted hijack plane, warning they could face “death and torture” if they were sent back to Afghanistan.
Alice Mahon, the MP for Halifax, urged the Home Secretary to take into account the “odious” nature of the ruling Taliban when deciding the fate of the hijackers and passengers.He should consult countries with opposition movements to the Taliban “to see if perhaps they would take them, before sending them back to what would certainly be death and torture”, she said.Mr Straw, in an emergency statement on the hijack, stressed that any removals from the UK could be to neighbouring countries rather than Afghanistan itself.John McDonnell, the MP for Hayes and Harlington, said he hoped “this incident will not be dragged into the current racist campaign that is being waged against asylum seekers.”Two weeks ago in my constituency a 49-year-old Lithuanian who was to be deported was found hanging at Harmsworth detention centre the following morning. I think it’s important we weigh our words and actions very carefully on issues like this,” he said.Mr Straw faced further embarrassment when Tory backbenchers congratulated him on his “robust” statement in which he pledged that Britain would not become a haven for hijackers seeking asylum.Douglas Hogg, MP for Sleaford and North Hykeham, called for a “minimum mandatory sentence” for hijacking, perhaps of 10 years, to which Mr Straw said: “I wouldn’t argue with your proposition.”Ann Widdecombe, the Shadow Home Secretary, told MPs a deterrent to future hijacks would be to ensure Britain’s asylum procedures were not “noticeably softer” than those in surrounding countries.”Why the UK? How many European Convention on Human Rights signatories did that plane fly over on its journey from to the UK?” she asked.Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesman, said: “Can we have rules that govern…

rather than you being able to pick and mix with nobody knowing if they are going to get special treatment from you or the normal treatment from somebody else?”. They came out of the plane into the biting wind and the spotlights hesitantly, women looking back towards their menfolk as they hugged their babies closer to them. They came out of the plane into the biting wind and the spotlights hesitantly, women looking back towards their menfolk as they hugged their babies closer to them.
They stepped out under the gaze of lines of police marksmen. In the final hours of the Stansted hijack, the situation was at its most tense and no one wanted to make a mistake.Then at this crucial point a series of sirens began to scream and vehicles with flashing red lights flashing hurtled across the tarmac. There was instant confusion and panic, cries of alarm and anger by the hijackers fearing they had fallen into a trap.The sirens had, in fact, nothing to do with the stranded Afghan airliner and had been in response to a fire breaking out at another part of the airport.But it was a nailbiting demonstration of the sheer fragility of the painstakingly orchestrated plan to end Britain’s longest ever hijack.A total of 85 passengers, among them 21 children and 17 women, left in the first batch, being driven off into the night for medical examination and then questioning on exactly what part they had played in the take-over of the Ariana Boeing 727 and its 3,652-mile journey.Two-and-a-half hours later the remaining 66 passengers, all male, made their way out in single file, huddled deep into their coats. As they passed the lines of police 17 were pulled out and taken off to waiting cars.

These were the chief suspects.Thus the Stansted Airport hijack ended. It had taken 76 hours but it had ended peacefully, as the authorities had always sought. Undoubtedly this will add the reputation of Britain not only as a country where hijackings do not end in gun battles, but also as a place where hijackers never get away with it.This denouement was only the beginning of the accusations and recriminations. This was not a proper hijack at all, snorted several newspapers and politicians in outrage, but an elaborate scam to gain asylum. The first blatant example of this exploitation of the British taxpayer was that the passengers were actually going to be put up at the Stansted Hilton (which had put up the price of some rooms to more than £200.)But the authorities were facing more pressing problems than accusations of profligacy. They faced the highly unusual situation in which a large number of passengers, instead of saying the Afghani equivalent of “It wasn’t me, guv” were only too keen to say “It’s a fair cop”.The reason, they believe, is that such a claim might bring a criminal charge of hijacking, but the sentence is likely to be a short one with the almost certain guarantee of asylum to follow. Merely being a passenger on an internal flight, however, would not constitute an attempt to get away from an oppressive regime.For Essex Police Chief Constable David Stevens, these were problems to be resolved by Jack Straw and the Home Office.

His hostage negotiators had carried out their task well – a job made more difficult however by the lack of any specific demands. For days the dialogue had revolved mainly around food and provisions.The police negotiators did their best to establish empathy with the hijackers and soon the two sides were calling each other by their first names.At first the Afghans were bewildered and exasperated by the way the police honed in on any request, however small, asking for precise details of what they wanted. In the case of a pen, they would be asked repeatedly whether a blue or a black one would be preferred. One senior police officer said: “This may sound bizarre, but it works. The main aim is to tie them up in knots and then gradually introduce your own demands.”The hijackers’ request that their refugee status should be recognised before any criminal charges were brought was rejected. However, they appear to have been led to believe that they would never be forcibly repatriated.