header-logo header-logo

19 July 2020
Issue: 7896 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Fair trial for Isis recruit

Shamima Begum, one of three east London schoolgirls who joined Isis in Syria in 2015 when she was 15 years old, will receive a fair trial only if she is allowed to return to the UK, the Court of Appeal has held

Begum is appealing against the government’s decision last February to revoke her citizenship. She is currently living in a refugee camp in Syria. The other two girls are believed to have died.

Ruling in Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 918 last week, Lord Justice Flaux, giving the lead judgment, said it was ‘unthinkable’ that Begum should contest her case from Syria.

On the point of whether she left for Syria of her own free will, Flaux LJ said: ‘I would be uneasy taking a course which, in effect, involved deciding that Ms Begum had left the UK as a 15 year old schoolgirl of her own free will in circumstances where one of the principal reasons why she cannot have a fair and effective appeal is her inability to give proper instructions or provide evidence.’

He agreed with human rights organisation, Liberty, intervening, that that if she can participate in her appeal, then it will be possible to explore the circumstances by which she left the UK, and whether she travelled of her own free will.

Katie Lines, a barrister working as a lawyer at Liberty, said: ‘It is a fundamental part of our justice system and equal access to justice must apply to everyone.’

A Home Office spokesperson said the decision was ‘disappointing’ and they would be seeking leave to appeal.

Issue: 7896 / Categories: Legal News , Constitutional law , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
back-to-top-scroll