Met faces new armed police allegations

Forest Gate press conference (2)Scotland Yard yesterday faced fresh controversy after it emerged that the man accidentally shot by police during an anti-terrorism raid in east London last year has claimed armed officers again threatened to shoot him and subjected him to racist abuse during a second recent incident.

Mohammed Abdul Kahar, 23, who was shot in the shoulder during a raid by police on his home in Forest Gate in 2006, says he and his brother Abul Koyair, 20, were stopped by armed police with one officer shouting “shoot him, shoot him”.

According to their account they were on a motorbike near their home two months ago when they stopped to watch a police operation at a pizza takeaway. As they drove off, they were followed by police and ordered to stop. According to the brothers, one officer emerged from the car carrying a handgun. A second officer allegedly shouted “shoot him, shoot him, put him down.” Mohammed Kahar said that he then replied: “Don’t shoot me, my hands are in the air.”

The brothers say they were manhandled off the motorcycle and one was pushed to the ground while the other was handcuffed. They claim that they were called “Paki”, “tossers” and “wankers”. Mohammed Kahar said he heard one officer say “that’s the two brothers” and another asked “how many millions do you get?” – presumably a reference to compensation to be paid to the men over last year’s raid. Their sister, who was passing by on a bus, intervened and was charged with a public order offence for which she has been issued with a fixed penalty notice.

Guardian, 3 November 2007

Only 1 in 400 anti-terror stop and searches leads to arrest

Stop and SearchOnly one in every 400 stop and searches carried out under sweeping anti-terrorism laws leads to an arrest, official figures released yesterday reveal, triggering fresh pressure on the government and police over the controversial tactic.

Official government figures covering 2005/6, the first since the July 7 2005 bombings on London, show a big increase in the use of the power, with Asian people bearing the brunt. One force, City of London, carried out 6,846 stops of pedestrians and vehicles without finding enough evidence to justify a single arrest.

Stops under the Terrorism Act 2000 rely more on an officer’s discretion than other powers to search, which require reasonable suspicion. The number of stops under terrorism laws in 2005/6 showed a 34% rise on the previous year to 44,543. Asians faced an increase of 84%, black people an increase of 51%, searches of “other” ethnic groups rose 36% and white people faced a 24% increase.

Experts believe anti-terrorism stop and searches have not led to a single person being caught who was later convicted of a terrorist offence. Ben Bowling, professor of criminal justice at King’s College London, said:

“If these people arrested were in possession of bombs you might say that’s fine, but I can’t recall a case where that’s happened. These powers are being used indiscriminately with a minimal result. The consequence of that is a loss in public confidence and a drop of support among those stopped without reason for the police.”

Guardian, 31 October 2007

Minister ‘deeply disappointed’ by US airport detention

Shahid MalikBritain’s first Muslim minister has described his disappointment at being detained – for a second time – at a US airport, where his hand luggage was analysed for traces of explosive materials.

International development minister Shahid Malik was returning to the UK yesterday morning after attending a series of meetings on tackling terrorism when was stopped and searched at Dulles Airport in Washington DC. The MP for Dewsbury was detained by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – the same department whose representatives he had been meeting on his visit to the country.

Mr Malik said yesterday: “After a few minutes a couple of other people were also taken to one side. We were all Muslims – the other two were black Muslims, both with Muslim names.”

Mr Malik said he was particularly annoyed, as a similar incident happened to him last year, when he was detained for an hour at JFK airport in New York by the DHS. After his detention yesterday, which lasted about 40 minutes, he said:

“I am deeply disappointed. The abusive attitude I endured last November I forgot about and I forgave but I really do believe that British ministers and parliamentarians should be afforded the same respect and dignity at USA airports that we would bestow upon our colleagues in the Senate and Congress.”

Press Association, 29 October 2007

Increased mosque attendance is evidence of terrorist associations say police

A hard core of 20 Islamic extremists with links to foreign terror groups is operating north of the Border and poses a “significant” risk to public safety, Scotland on Sunday can reveal. Senior intelligence insiders have revealed the suspects – many of them born and brought up in Scotland – pose a similar threat to that of Mohammed Atif Siddique, the Scottish Asian who was last week given an eight-year prison sentence for terrorist offences.

Scotland on Sunday can also reveal that concern at the terror threat is now so great that up to 1,000 Scottish Asians will be placed under surveillance in coming months because they associate with known radicals. Special Branch, backed by MI5 officers, will carry out checks on the individuals looking for evidence of radicalisation such as changes in clothing and increased mosque attendance.

Scotland on Sunday, 28 October 2007

Canada: Tory bill would ban voting while wearing veil

A bill requiring visual identification when voting in federal elections has come to Parliament, largely due to controversy in Quebec over veiled women voting. The controversy over veiled voters arose when a ruling from Elections Canada allowed veiled women to cast ballots in three recent Quebec by-elections.

The Conservatives decided legislation was necessary after Marc Mayrand, Canada’s chief electoral officer, rebuffed efforts by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to get him to adjust voting rules to force women to bare their faces at polls. “I think it is necessary to maintaining public confidence in … the electoral process,” Conservative House Leader Peter Van Loan told the Toronto Star yesterday.

Mayrand noted the revised federal electoral law that Parliament passed in June did not compel women with veils to remove them as part of voter identification, explaining that if MPs want that to be a rule, they should pass a new law.

The Conservative government’s obsession with women having to lift their veils is seen by some as much ado about nothing. “This so-called veil problem is not even a problem that’s been raised with the Muslim community,” NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

Toronto Star, 27 October 2007

Austria: provincial parliament demands ban on mosque construction

The provincial parliament in the southern Austrian province Carinthia called on its provincial government to prepare legislation banning the construction of mosques or minarets. The province’s governor, the populist former leader of the rightist Freedom Party, Joerg Haider, had repeatedly called for anti-Muslim measures along those lines.

The proposal was adopted with the votes of the conservative People’s Party, Freedom Party, and the support of the Alliance for Austria’s Future, an equally rightist breakaway party from the Freedom Party, founded by Haider. Alliance floor leader Kurt Scheuch said his party wanted to prevent the creeping Islamization by radical forces. “We prefer churchbells to the muezzin’s chants,” he said.

Carinthia’s Social Democrats and Greens, who had voted against the measure, slammed the proposal as a move to “prevent integration (and) hinder religious freedom” and called it an “open attack on democracy and the rule of law.” The Social Democrats pointed out that currently there were no plans for for building mosques in the province, unmasking the proposal as an attempt to “attract the right-wing vote,” Social Democrat floor leader Peter Kaiser said.

Earth Times, 25 October 2007

Mohammed Atif Siddique sentenced to 8 years in prison

When we wrote about Mohammed Atif Siddique’s conviction for terrorist related offences in September we commented that without the amended Terrorism Act of 2000 it was unlikely that the Crown would have been able to make a breach of the peace charge stick.

Today Siddique was sentenced to 8 years in prison on 3 terrorism charges, all of which are related to documents available on the internet.

During the trial there was no evidence produced that Mohammed Siddique was involved in planning any violence; a spokesman for Central Scotland Police said there was “no evidence that Siddique was involved in an actual terrorist plot”

In the days after he was found guilty the Scottish press carried ever more sensational claims about what Siddique was going to do if he had not been arrested and repeatedly referred to him as an “al-Qaeda-linked terrorist”.

The Scotsman suggested he “may” have been planning an attack in Canada while the right wing tabloids were absolutely sure he was going to behead the Canadian Prime Minister.

BNP candidate Robert Cottage was recently found guilty of possessing bomb making chemicals and was sentenced to 2 and a half years.

Mohammed Atif Siddique has been sentenced to 8 years in jail for being in possession of documents that one of the expert witnesses, Evan Kohlmann, has available on his website.

The conviction of Mohammed Siddique under the amended Terrorism Act and his 8-year prison sentence should concern every individual in the UK who questions the foreign policy of the British government; this is a piece of legislation that can be used to send people to prison without any evidence that they have actually done anything wrong.

Smith creates ‘climate of fear’

Smith Creates Climate of FearSmith creates ‘climate of fear’

By James Tweedie

Morning Star, 23 October 2007

HOME Secretary Jacqui Smith appeared before the Commons home affairs committee on Monday for questioning on government plans to extend detention without trial for terror suspects.

The government is considering increasing the limit the current 28-day limit to 56 days – or even to an indefinite period with judicial oversight.

It is also examining the use of phone tap and other “intercept” evidence, imposing “enhanced” sentences for non-terrorist offences committed for a terrorist purpose and broadening the definition of terrorism to include acts carried out for racial and ethnic as well as political aims.

Ms Smith told MPs that the “time is right” for extending the maximum period beyond 28 days. But she admitted that there had not yet been a case where longer than the current four-week limit has been required.

Committee chairman Keith Vaz warned that extra detention power could disproportionately affect Muslims. “The worry about this is that we then stigmatise whole communities and, in my view, that is the road to ruin,” he said.

Human rights campaign Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti also warned that Britain was heading for a state of “permament emergency”.

“The Home Secretary’s revelation that the case has not been made for extending pre-charge detention will be met with considerable surprise,” she said. “There has been so much posturing by so-called experts that few people have remembered to ask for the hard evidence before any change is made.”

Fellow campaigners Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a briefing paper on counter-terrorism measures yesterday, entitled UK: Counter the Threat or Counterproductive? HRW associate Europe and Central Asia director Benjamin Ward said: “Locking up suspects without charge for months at a time is wrong in principle and wrong in practice. It violates the basic right to liberty and risks alienating British Muslims.”

The HRW paper pointed out that less than half of those detained under counter-terrorism powers have been convicted. It says:

“Adopting powers that allow terrorism suspects – many if not most of whom would doubtless be British Muslims – to be detained without charge for months at a time would be deeply damaging to the government’s efforts to win ‘hearts and minds.’ Judicially supervised pre-charge detention without time limits would amount to the reintroduction of internment, a policy widely acknowledged to have alienated communities in Northern Ireland.”

Mr Ward noted that Counter-terrorism Minister Tony McNulty has acknowledged that “the rules of the game haven’t changed” on civil liberties. “The government is finally saying the right things about human rights and security, but the proof will be in the policy,” he said. “If the government is serious about playing by the rules, it should shelve extended pre-charge detention.”

Campaign Against Criminalising Communities spokesman Les Levidow added: “The analogy with Northern Ireland is entirely correct. That is why we have always called detention without trial internment. It’s punishment without trial. The proposals to extend pre-trial detention and introduce post-charge questioning by police are designed for political harrassment.”

“These powers have been disproportionately targeted against Muslims. Clearly, the political aim is to intimidate these communities,” Mr Levidow continued. “These powers are not needed to protect us from violence. They are part of the government’s political aims of suppressing freedom of speech and creating a climate of fear.”

Islamic scarfs face ban in Australia

The Howard Government is considering banning Islamic scarfs at Australian airports, senior government sources have revealed. The security measure would see even the most inoffensive Muslim scarf, the hijab, which covers the hair and neck, banned, along with several other types.

Security officials were especially concerned by two other types of scarf, the niqab and burka. The niqab covers the face, but leaves the eyes exposed, while the burka covers the entire face, with only a mesh screen for the eyes.

The scarf policy is under active consideration in Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews’ office, which is consulting airport security officials over the policy.

Herald Sun, 14 October 2007

Update:  The Sydney Morning Herald quotes a spokeswoman for Andrews as saying: “I can say that the minister’s office is absolutely not considering any such plan.”

No more torture in our name

No More TortureNo more torture in our name

By Louise Nousratpour

Morning Star, 10 October 2007

AMNESTY International UK launched a hard-hitting campaign on Monday against human rights abuses in the name of the “war on terror.” The human rights organisation called on people to make a stand against terrorism and against civil liberties being eroded by governments claiming to fight al-Qaida. The billboard and internet campaign is called Unsubscribe, after the process that internet users use to reject unwanted emails.

Speaking at a launch event in Birmingham, Amnesty International UK director Kate Allen said: “Unsubscribe is about rejecting the false choice between terrorism on the one hand and abuse of human rights on the other.” She stressed people’s opposition to the government’s detention without charge or trial of terror suspects under the pretext of national security. “They believe people have a right to know why they are being detained and they believe in the right to have a fair trial if someone is suspected of a serious offence,” Ms Allen added.

As part of the campaign, Amnesty has launched a powerful new two-minute drama film depicting the suffering of a hooded prisoner undergoing “stress and duress” torture by an unnamed man in plain clothes. In the film, which is called Waiting for the Guard and can be seen online at www.unsubscribe-me.org, the prisoner is seen stripped to his underwear in an underground chamber and forced to sit with his head a knee level.

Former Guantanamo Bay detainee Moazzam Begg said that the Unsubscribe film brought back unpleasant memories. “You cannot imagine that happening to anybody, let alone yourself,” said Mr Begg, who was held without charge for two years at the notorious US prison camp. “The way that I tried almost to tackle it was to say that it didn’t happen to me, it happened to someone else.”

Mr Begg said that worse abuses of human rights go on in “ghost” detention camps, referring to widely reported secret CIA “torture camps” that are scattered across the world. “These kinds of things continue to exist. Perhaps they don’t happen at Guantanamo any more, but there are other sites that people have to pass through,” he warned. “By the time I was sent to Guantanamo, I was looking forward to it.”

National Union of Students president Gemma Tumulty said that the campaign would give millions of students in Britain a voice to their “instinctive feeling that something has been going badly wrong in the ‘war on terror’.”

Amnesty will also display a series of hard-hitting billboard posters across the country. They will reproduce some of the most infamous images of human rights abuses from the “war on terror”. The images include an Abu Ghraib prisoner in Iraq being attacked by a dog and a Guantanamo Bay detainee being abused. The posters all bear the message Unsubscribe and will be displayed during October on the streets of Birmingham, London, Glasgow, Belfast, Cardiff, Leeds and Manchester.