I D S E L F A E M N

Deportation proceedings pit the rights of the individual against the responsibilities of the state – the guardian of the public interest. [...] 13 However, it is worth mentioning that a series of exceptions are stated in Article 8(2) of the ECHR: There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder. [...] It shows that in the case of the deportee facing a) a serious risk of violence in the destination-country; and b) a serious risk of being unable to access necessary medicine and healthcare in the destination-country, the majority of respondents who voted for the Conservative Party in the 2019 UK General Election are still supportive of deportation in both cases (54 per cent and 64 per cent respect. [...] This highlights the importance of human rights compliance and the integrity of legal structures in other parts of the world, which facilitates the deportation of foreign criminals from the UK and to a non-European country of origin. [...] In conclusion, there are (at least) two very clear influences on the success and failure of the deportation of foreign nationals convicted of Islamist TROs: the risk of overseas torture in the destination-country and the family-related circumstances of the individual in the UK.