Adjournment = More Campaigning
On 27th October, the fourth day of Samar and Jawad’s appeal hearing, the case was adjourned, probably for several months. Our concern that Samar and Jawad are convenient scapegoats who are being denied access to the information which could exonerate them is deepened by developments at the Court of Appeal.
The Birmingham Six were known to be innocent for years before their release. The judiciary was reluctant to allow their appeals because to do so would discredit the police! It was only after massive campaigning that public outcries at the blatant injustice could not be ignored any longer.
New Evidence
Last week the defence announced to the Appeal Court that they had received additional information from a member of the public about another possible suspect in the bombings. It appears that this evidence was given to the police in 1994 but was never disclosed to judges or the defence. The appeal is adjourned while the defence investigates this additional information and the piece of evidence the judges disclosed.
Political Pawns
For five long years Samar and Jawad have been victims of the prosecution's systematic suppression of evidence, a policy agreed to by Home Secretary, Jack Straw, in 1998. There is a very real danger that they may serve the full twenty years of their sentence. It is quite clear that Samar and Jawad have had no chance to defend themselves fairly and that something other than 'human error' is blocking their ability to secure an acquittal. The suppression of vital evidence by so many branches of the executive and the decision to prosecute are political decisions. Just as the British Government is doing nothing to end the terrible injustice facing Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, they are prepared to do nothing to end the injustice suffered by Samar and Jawad.
Thanks to our Supporters and Observers
The picket was very successful and positive. We were serenaded by the Red Choir from Wales, Razia from Brighton and Camilla and friends. Family, friends and supporters came from Lebanon, the West Bank, Jerusalem, Leicester, Scotland, Wales, Derby, Manchester, Brighton and London. Also in attendance were: Mr. Safieh (Palestine General Delegate to the UK), Halya Gowan from Amnesty International, Bruce Kent, Dr. Jarman from Churches Human Rights, Sir Cyril Townsend from CAABU, Mr. Al Mukhtar on behalf of The Union of Arab Lawyers and the Arab Organisation for Human Rights, The Association of Palestinian Community, The National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns, Newham Monitoring Group, Miscarriages of Justice UK,the Association of Palestinian Community, Crossroads Women's Centre.
Parliament and Government
The Campaign is meeting with sympathetic MPs to explore the possibilities of exposing this scandal and raising questions in the House of Commons. We will also be writing more generally to MPs to point out the obvious miscarriage of justice which is resulting from the demands of the security services for secrecy.
Branching Out
We are continuing to follow up the case with Arab ambassadors in the UK, and supporters could continue to urge their ambassadors to make representations. We are also working with human rights groups, community associations, NGOs, and other campaigns to alert them to what is happening and to make sure they protest against this miscarriage of justice and the catalogue of ‘human errors.’
Building Public Support - What you can do
Samar and Jawad have already sacrificed five years of their lives and it is up to us to ensure that the weight of public opinion in the next few months is such that their conviction must be quashed. Public campaigning is vital.
We are planning a public meeting and a new booklet on the case but we need your ideas about where else to publicise the case. We can provide speakers but you may have ideas of celebrities, politicians etc. who would support the campaign. We need to bombard the press and the Government.
Here are some points to include in any letters:
- the case was unfairly loaded from the start by the use of PII Certificates;
- Jack Straw has continued to sign PIIs;
- vital edidence possibly implicating parties other than the defendants was deliberately withheld from the trial judge;
- the deliberate failure to disclose is unacceptable and unfair, and has cast very serious doubts about the whole case;
- new evidence points to police knowledge of the possible involvement of another suspect;
- the prosecution were lying about an ‘intelligence vacuum’ around the case;
- ‘human error’ and ‘filing problems’ cannot explain this repeated non-disclosure;
- the government seems prepared to see two innocent people paying the price for the ‘human errors’ and security services’ demands for secrecy;
- the miscarriage of justice must be ended. The prosecution must not contest the appeal.
Other things you can do:
- We need an email and letter campaign to Jack Straw; Home Secretary, Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1 9AT
e-mail: gen.ho@gtnet.gov.uk;
- Write to David Calvert-Smith, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Crown Prosecution Service Headquarters, 50 Ludgate Hill, London EC4M 7EY Tel:020 7796 8000 (switchboard) or 020 7796 8433/7796 8486; fax: 020 7796 8680 (especially on the day of action on 11th December);
- Write to your MP about Samar and Jawad at The House of Commons, London SW1A OAA;
- Write to Lord Williams of Mostyn, the Attorney General, 9, Buckingham Gate, London, SW1E 6JF Tel: 0171 271 2460;
- Write to the newspapers;
- Raise the issue in your union branch (work place, church, mosque);
- Set up meetings;
- make a donation (please make cheques payable to FOSA);
- Write to Samar and Jawad.
Samar and Jawad need more support than ever. The interminable wait for the appeal has ended in more waiting. Please write to them. Samar is still in Holloway prison and Jawad will be returning to Frankland quite soon. Don’t forget Samar’s birthday on 22nd November and Jawad’s birthday on 13th November and that the month of Ramadan starts on 25th November.
The Appeal So Far
The case against Samar and Jawad has been unfairly loaded from the start by the repeated use of Public Interest Immunity Certificates to withhold relevant information from the defence. The revelations of David Shayler showed that information was also withheld from the original trial judge. The defence argued that, particularly in the light of a European Court of Human Rights ruling in the M25 case which was accepted in their appeal in July , the original trial was unfair because the judge did not have access to all relevant information. This breach of fairness could not be remedied unless the judges ordered full disclosure and/or a retrial. The fact that we now have a Human Rights Act should have emphasised this.
Unfortunately the appeal judges went ahead and held another PII hearing in camera to look at the mass of ‘secret’ evidence. After this, a few hand-written pages of information were disclosed to the defence. These pages state that: ‘Some months prior to the bombing of the Israeli Embassy on July 26th 1994, the security services (MI5 & MI6) and the Special Branch received information from an agent source that a terrorist organisation unconnected to the two appellants was seeking information about the location and defences of the embassy for a possible bombing attack’ adding that ‘the terrorist organisation had not in fact carried out the bombing.’
This is a crucial admission from the prosecution that demolishes its argument that the attacks were carried out by a few disgruntled London-based Palestinians and exposes the cynicism of their repeated assertions that there was an ‘intelligence vacuum’ around the bombings.
The prosecution’s official excuse in the Appeal Court for this information not being revealed to the original trial judge is ‘human error’ and ‘filing problems.’ As Paul Foot says in The Guardian (31.10.00), ‘there are only two possible conclusions: the security services are so hopelessly disorganised that they cannot follow elementary rules of disclosure and that even in cases involving terrorism and bombing there is not the slightest chance that they will make good use of any information they receive. The second is that in this case MI5, MI6 and special branch conspired not to disclose information which might damage the prosecution of Samar and Jawad.’
Meanwhile the CPS continues to withhold much additional material including that covering Israeli activities at the sites of the bombs and anything which sheds light on David Shayler’s information that he had seen another document in which an MI6 officer suggested the involvement of Israeli intelligence. This unbelievable failure to disclose has occurred across MI5, MI6, Special Branch, the prosecution, the Home Office, for the last six years! The prosecution persists in trying to uphold the convictions, prepared to see two innocent people paying the price for the ‘human errors’ and systematic suppression of evidence.
Following the admissions of human error by the prosecution, the trial must be declared unfair. The Director of Public Prosecutions, David Calvert-Smith QC, has the authority to drop the case/not contest the appeal. As he was the lead prosecution counsel at the original trial he must know the extent of the ‘bungling’ and should ensure that this miscarriage of justice is ended now.
‘At last I have been proven right’
(David Shayler in Mail on Sunday)
‘Evidence about a new suspect in the Israeli Embassy case will further embarrass the security services.’ (Observer)
‘Witness casts doubt on bomb convictions’
(The Sunday Times)
‘The Crown Prosecution Service was forced by the Court of Appeal yesterday to admit that the MI5 officer, David Shayler, was right.’ (Independent)
|
top of page
|
