The reason he can’t be deported to Jordan is because the “evidence” used to prove that he’s a big bad dangerous terrorist was obtained by torture. I.e. it is not “evidence”. Or, to put it another way, there’s no evidence (real evidence) he has done anything wrong
If the Jordanians can provide guarantees that he won’t be tortured or executed and his trial will be fair (no “evidence” from torture since that pretty much instantly destroys any pretence of justice) then the ECHR won’t block his deportation. Simple as.
The reason why he’s not in gaol in the UK after being charged with terrorism offences or other bad/naughty crimes is because we have fuck all evidence with which to do so. If we did, we’d have done it and would now be having smug politicians on the television saying how wonderful their anti-terror strategies are. Thankfully I am spared the urge to punch my television screen.
Or, to put it another way, the only reason why this man isn’t in prison here or in Jordan is because, legally, locking people up because the people in charge say “he’s a bad man, honest” is not advisable, ethical, moral, or even remotely sensible. As and when sufficient assurances are received from Jordan then the deportation can happen and everyone can kindly unknot their twisted knickers, please.
And to the Tories and their sympathisers whining about “sovereignty”. Kindly cease your whining, it’s giving me a headache. The court is preventing us from including torture in the application of “justice”. If the court is stopping us aiding, abetting, consenting or approving to torture then I will gladly kneel before it in a kinky kinky harness and call it “Sir”
Frankly, I’m embarrassed that we require the intervention. When we grow up and act like a civilised nation, perhaps the court will treat us like one. Until that time, the court sending us to a corner and telling us "no" seems quite reasonable. And kinky. I seem to have got distracted somewhere along the line, but my point stands.