Terror laws in doubt as 'suicide bomber' is freed

Published on Tuesday 9 February 2010 22:01

BRITAIN'S terror laws have once again been thrown into question after a Scottish student branded "a wannabe suicide bomber" was freed half way through an eight-year prison sentence.

• Siddique (right, in foreground) leaves court in Edinburgh with family members and lawyer Aamer Anwar, left. Picture: Neil Hanna

Judges yesterday quashed the main conviction of Mohammed Atif Siddique, the only Scot ever brought to trial under legislation designed to catch those who plot, inspire or even consider terrorist acts.

The Court of Appeal said the 24-year-old had suffered a "miscarriage of justice" after ruling that his original trial judge misdirected the jury on what critics believe is a vaguely-worded section of the controversial 2000 Terrorism Act.

The ruling is the latest in a succession of court decisions that have challenged how Britain's terror laws are framed and interpreted.

Siddique, a shopkeeper's son, had been found guilty of possessing al-Qaeda-inspired materials on his laptop that were deemed, under the increasingly notorious Section 57 of the act, to have "given rise to reasonable suspicion" that they were designed "for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism".

His lawyers, however, argued he had been convicted of a "thought crime", of thinking of committing an offence rather than actually carrying one out, after viewing radical websites.

The former student, from the quiet Clackmannanshire town of Alva, yesterday said he had always argued that he was "simply looking for answers on the internet" and that he had "never had any bombs or plans to hurt anyone".

Siddique, who was convicted in October 2007, has been in custody since he was arrested in April 2006 after trying to board a flight for Pakistan. He remains convicted of three lesser terrorism charges but was freed having served his time for those offences.

The Edinburgh court's decision comes just a month after stop-and-search rules introduced under the 2000 act were deemed illegal by the European Court of Human Rights. And last month two terror suspects won a ruling at London's High Court that paves the way for the first compensation claims against the Home Secretary relating to control orders.

Section 57 of the 2000 Terrorism Act – the offence of possessing "articles" for terrorist purposes – emerged from the lessons of Northern Ireland where police sometimes caught paramilitaries with DIY bomb parts – but no actual bomb or plot.

But in the age of al-Qaeda inspired extremism, it has been used against suspects found with extremist material on their computers.

The Court of Appeal in England has previously criticised the vague phraseology of the offence and yesterday's decision in Scotland sparked calls for a radical overhaul of the legislation.

Scotland's leading human rights lawyer, John Scott, said: "The quashing of this conviction is too big a deal to be ignored.

"It is not good enough just to carry on as if nothing has happened. What we have seen is the Court of Appeal effectively quash a conviction because of deficiencies in the legislation.

"All terrorism law should now be looked at to see if it does what it is supposed to do and no more than it was supposed to do. The practice of the police and prosecutors should be part of that review."

Mr Scott and other lawyers believe yesterday's decision – and those in England that have preceded it – have gone some way to clear up what critics always thought was a vague section of law.

Siddique's solicitor, Aamer Anwar, yesterday explained that it was earlier efforts to clarify the law in England that helped inform yesterday's Court of Appeal decision and free his client.

But Mr Anwar said there remained "grey areas" over where exactly the line was drawn between thoughts and deeds is crossed.

Osama Saeed, chief executive of the Scottish Islamic Foundation, agreed. He said: "There needs to be a clearer explanation by police and government of the line between someone looking at things on the internet and the point at which they move into criminality.

"This is at the heart of the Siddique case."

The Crown Office yesterday insisted it now knew where the line lay. A spokeswoman said: "The law in relation to section 57 has developed since the trial judge charged the jury and has been clarified in a number of subsequent decisions in the English courts."

The Crown allowed Siddique to be released after announcing that it would not seek a retrial on the Section 57 charge, saying such a move would have "little practical effect" given the time Siddique had already spent in prison. The three appeal judges – Lords Osborne, Reed and Clarke – had come to the conclusion that Siddique's original jury had been misdirected last month.

They had given the Crown until yesterday to decide whether to retry the student.

Mr Scott, however, said he believed the decision not to retry Siddique showed that the Crown and the police did not believe the former student posed a serious threat to the public.

"There would have been a variety of security assessments carried out before they made his decision," he said.

The Scotsman understands that Siddique has not been put on Home Office terror watchlists and is not subject to expanded no-fly rules introduced by Prime Minister Gordon Brown after the Christmas Day attempt to blow up an airliner over Detroit.

Siddique, however, does have to inform the police of his whereabouts and any travel plans.

Speaking after an emotional reunion with family and friends in the court concourse, Siddique said: "Our laws should bring to account those who plan acts of terror and not criminalise young Muslims for thought crime and possession of propaganda.

"I have always maintained my innocence but they took my liberty, destroyed my family's reputation and labelled me a terrorist, but I never had any bombs or plans to hurt anyone.

"In court it was said I was a 'wannabe suicide bomber', but I have always said I was simply looking for answers on the internet. I am grateful to those who supported me.

"I just want to go home now, and live my life in peace."

Mr Anwar added: "At the end of Atif's trial, I stated on his behalf that the verdict was a tragedy for justice and freedom of speech.

"After nearly four years of struggle, the highest court in the land has ruled a miscarriage of justice took place and given a young man his freedom back."

The Siddique family convenience store in Alva was shut for much of yesterday, a sign on its shutters saying "Sorry, shop closed until the afternoon, sorry for any inconvenience".

Last night, Siddique's elder brother, Asif, 29, opened up for business. "Obviously, we are all delighted," he said as customers congratulated him on the day's events.

Related articles:

Firm belief among Muslims that justice determined by faith

A polite young man who loved football and Islam too

Lack of resources for vital 'deradicalisation'

Siddique is still guilty of three charges say judges