Abu Qatada could be freed from jail in days Abu Qatada in 2001. Photograph: Suki Dhanda for the Observer Radical cleric Abu Qatada is expected to be freed from jail on Monday and will have many of his bail conditions lifted by the middle of April, according to legal experts, who predict that he could be free of all restrictions on his movements by 2014. The government is desperately trying to deport to Jordan the man home secretary Theresa May claims "poses a serious risk to our national security." In 1999 the Jordanians convicted Qatada in his absence of terror-related activities. However, legal experts believe the government's room for manoeuvre is limited. Qatada was bailed last week after a judge at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) ruled that May had failed to make progress in his deportation. The decision came after the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) blocked Qatada's deportation under article six of the European convention - the right to a fair trial - on the ground that Jordan might use against him evidence that had been obtained by torture. The government could appeal against this decision to the court's Grand Chamber, an unusual move that would see 20 of its judges hear the case. But Qatada's legal team believe the ruling gives the government little hope for success. The ECHR ruling was made on 17 January and if the government wants to appeal against the decision it must do so within three months. If it fails to appeal by 17 April, or if the appeal is not allowed, the restrictions imposed on Qatada when he leaves jail, including a 22-hour curfew and no access to the internet or telephone, will be subject to revision. The government could then seek a temporary prevention investigation measure, but this requires evidence of "new terrorism-related activity," which would appear difficult to prove as Qatada has been in jail for the past six years. Prior to this he was held for more than three years before being briefly released. "He has served the equivalent of an 18-year sentence without conviction, which is unprecedented," said Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of the probation union Napo. The authorities have a real dilemma. They could seek to charge him with incitement, but this typically carries sentences of around five years, so he would walk free. The chances of overturning article six look bleak. The current restrictions expire in two months and then he would be under a temporary prevention investigation measure that would expire in 2014. Trying Qatada in the UK is not considered an option. Legal experts believe there is little, if any, evidence that has been obtained lawfully that could be used against him. It is also suggested that any prosecution would hear evidence of how the security services sought to cultivate a relationship with Qatada that would prove embarrassing. According to documents filed with Siac: "In 1996-98, the security service had been asking him to act as a restraint on Armed Islamic Group and more generally Algerian refugee activities in the UK." Security services have also been accused of offering a former associate of Qatada a fresh identity and money if he helped to convict the cleric. Qatada's lawyers say they are aware of a "significant number" of people who claim they were tortured to present evidence against him. Qatada's release will trigger a furore. According to claims made on behalf of the government to Siac in 2007, Qatada has since 1995 "given encouragement to the commission, preparation and instigation of terrorism overseas by providing spiritual and religious advice to a number of extreme Islamists prepared to carry out terrorist attacks." The Siac documents said: "These groups and networks include the al-Qaida network, the Armed Islamic Group, the Salafist Group for Call and Combat, and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad." Any attempt to deport Qatada would immediately trigger an appeal from his lawyers that would block his removal. Human rights groups would also be dismayed. Tara Lyle of Amnesty International said: "The UK signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights and to the jurisdiction of the court because of a belief in its fundamental values, including the prohibition of torture and the right to a fair trial, even for those who may have committed crimes or with whose views we do not agree."