Dear Mr Calvert-Smith,
We are writing to you on the fourth anniversary of the conviction of Samar Alami and Jawad Botmeh on charges of conspiracy, in connection with the bombing of the Israeli Embassy in July 1994. As you know their appeal hearing was adjourned on 27th October.
Recently you have been involved in the debates around the Freedom of Information Bill. We welcome your clear and forthright views on the duty of the CPS for disclosure of evidence to avert miscarriages of justice. We also note the recent guidelines issued by the Attorney-General, which you have supported and about which you have issued statements to the press condemning those within the prosecution service who failed to meet their disclosure obligations. With these guidelines the Attorney General has said that he wants to end miscarriages of justice which he describes as a "travesty" of the criminal justice system.
We believe that non-disclosure of evidence before, during and after the trial of Ms. Alami and Mr. Botmeh has led to their wrongful conviction, a conviction which resulted in a sentence for twenty years. As you were the lead prosecutor at their original trial you are in the position of knowing just how much information was withheld at that time. You will now also be aware of the recent revelations about evidence previously withheld even from the trial judge.
After another Public Interest Immunity hearing to look at the mass of 'secret' evidence the appeal judges disclosed a few hand-written pages of information to the defence. This scrap of information confirms that a known terrorist organisation with no connection to either of the appellants was seeking information about the Israeli Embassy. This information contradicts the basis of the prosecution case at the trial of Ms. Alami and Mr. Botmeh, that there was an "intelligence vacuum", and that the bombings had been carried out by a small, unknown, amateur group of Palestinians in Britain.
The information had been already revealed by David Shayler, yet the prosecution continued to ask for non-disclosure before the appeal judges finally acknowledged it to the defence. The prosecution explained the non-disclosure of this evidence to the trial judge as 'human error'. This would be laughable if it was not so serious. It appears more like deliberate concealment.
After this example we have no confidence in the continued assertion of the CPS that the boxes of 'secret' evidence they are holding will not affect the defence. The only conclusion we can make is that a cover-up on behalf of, or at the behest of, various organisations within the police, security services and the government is being undertaken by the CPS.
In addition to this evidence, the defence announced to the Appeal Court that they had recently received additional information from a member of the public about another possible suspect in the bombings. It appears that this information, including a photograph of the man, was given to the police in 1994 but was never disclosed to judges or the defence. We do not know if this is part of the undisclosed information held by your office.
What is now known is that there were two distinct leads in this case known at the time of the trial which were denied to the defence. As the Attorney General's new disclosure guidelines make clear, the human rights of defendants are under attack if they are denied a fair trial because of undisclosed evidence. The British justice system is ill served by continuing miscarriages of justice. Surely it is the duty of the CPS to play an honourable and just part in the system.
It is now clear that the CPS have manifestly failed to fulfil their disclosure obligations in this case and Ms. Alami and Mr. Botmeh did not have a fair trial, with the result that innocent people have been convicted. As the head of the prosecuting service we ask that you drop the case against Ms Alami and Mr Botmeh and ensure that this miscarriage of justice ends now.
Yours sincerely,