Hijack drama ends, 60 seek asylum in UK

Hijack drama ends, 60 seek asylum in UK
ANJALI MODY

LONDON, FEBRUARY 10: The hijack of the Afghan airline, Ariana, plane ended early on Thursday morning, with the safe release of the remaining 150 passengers and crew.

The passengers were released in two groups, after face-to-face negotiations between two of the hijackers and British police before shortly before dawn. The first group of 85, released just after 3 am, included women and 20 or so children. Just after 6 am, another group of 65, mostly men walked off the plane -- this group is thought to have included the hijackers.

The Ariana Boeing 727 was hijacked last Sunday 20 minutes after it took-off from Kabul on a domestic run to Mazar-e-Sharif. The plane landed at London's Stansted airport early on Monday morning after a dramatic journey via Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia.

Nineteen people have been arrested on suspicion of involvement in the hijack and police say they have recovered four handguns, five knives, one knuckle-duster, two detonators and two grenades without fuses.

The otherpassengers are at a secure centre. At a press conference on Thursday morning, Chief Constable of Essex Police, David Stephens, who was in-charge of the negotiations, was asked if the 19 arrested were the only ones involved. He said that a complex criminal investigation was underway and no charges had yet been filed.

Asked whether others on the plane might also be involved, he said that police could not speculate on the issue. He said all passengers would be interviewed and that any passenger ``involved in any way in the arrival of the aircraft at Stansted airport'' would be criminally liable.

But the questions about who the hijackers are and what it is that they wanted remain unanswered. Chief Constable Stephens conceded that even the police officials ``were not clear what the motive was''.

From the limited information available so far, it does appear that the hijackers were amateurs uncertain of how they should proceed. In the last couple of days the hijackers have been described variously as ``keen tosave their own skins'' and ``well educated, calm and persistent''. There has been widespread speculation here that the hijack was just an elaborate and well planned bid to flee Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

Britain is the favoured destination of a large number of people fleeing political oppression or those simply seeking a better life. Afghans are among the single largest nationality of asylum applicants in the UK, averaging 360 a month in the last six months.

There have been reports that as many as a third of the passengers on the Ariana may have been involved in the hijack. A member of the crew, who was released in Moscow, is reported to have told Ariana officials that at least 40 of the passengers, apparently of a marriage party, had links with the hijackers.

In fact, throughout the three days that the hijackers talked to British police they did not make any political demands. Stephens said that at no time during the 70 hours of negotiation did the hijackers make any political demands. He said that itwas only in the last hour, ``between 5 and 6 am'', that the hijackers mentioned concerns about Afghanistn's political situation.

Speculation emanating from Kabul and Islamabad that they wanted the release of pro-Rabbanni General Ismail Khan has been denied. Stephens said that at no time was there any mention of the release of any individual in Afghanistan.

At least 60 passengers from the Ariana aircraft have applied for asylum since this morning, giving credence to the asylum theory. Under international law, Britain is obliged to consider an application for political asylum of any person entering the country.

In the case of the hijackers themselves, this is secondary to the completion of criminal proceedings. Asylum applications sometime take years to be fully processed. But the British government is unwilling to be seen as a ``soft'' target for what the political right calls ``bogus asylum seekers''. British Home Secretary Jack Straw said on Thursday morning that he would deal personally with allrequests for asylum from passengers on the plane. He said: ``Subject to all legal requirements, I would wish to see removed from this country all those on the plane, as soon as is reasonably practicable.''

There is, however, a precedent for the hijackers receiving political asylum in Britain. In 1996, six Iraqi men hijacked a Sudanese airliner and diverted it to London. All six were convicted on charges of hijacking. Their convictions were overturned on the grounds that there were overwhelming political considerations. They are still in Britain.

Meanwhile, comparisons between the hijack of the Indian Airline plane in December and the Ariana hijack are being made. There have been suggestions that the concessions India made to secure the release of the passengers on the hijacked Indian Airline plane may have encouraged the Afghan hijackers.

However, the situations in Kandahar and London could not be more different. In the Indian case the hijackers had clear political demands, the Afghan hijackers of theAriana plane, however, only asked for warm food, clean toilettes and generators to run the plane's air-conditioners.

In Kandahar India was forced to deal with a regime it does not officially recognise and one which does not recognise most international conventions. Britain, on the other hand, is a fully signed up member of the international community, and seeks to work within the law.