 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 8 - 14 July 1999 Issue No. 437 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 8 - 14 July 1999 Issue No. 437
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Profile Features Focus Books Travel Living Sports Time Out Chronicles People Cartoons Letters The right to remain silent
By Jailan HalawiA suspect is innocent until proven guilty. Invoking this basic legal principle, a British court this week ruled in favour of three London-based Islamists, turning down a police request to question them in connection with suspected involvement in terrorism. The suspects include two Egyptians who are leaders of Ansar El-Shari'a, "Upholders of Islamic Law." They are Mustafa Kamel, alias Abu Hamza and Yasser El-Serri, who goes by the name Abu Ammar. The latter was sentenced to death in absentia by the Supreme Military Court in Cairo in 1994 for plotting an attack against then Prime Minister Atef Sidki. He was also sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia by the same court in April. He has been seeking political refugee status in Britain.
Abu Hamza, who lost both hands and an eye while fighting Soviet occupation troops in Afghanistan, had repeatedly expressed his hatred of the United States and urged the targeting of American military personnel as well as civilians. He has also publicly praised Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, accused by the United States of masterminding the bombing of its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania last summer. Four months ago, Abu Hamza chaired a meeting of Islamists in London, in which he unveiled what he claimed to be his latest invention to fight "arrogant Western powers," in particular the US. His brainchild was described as "air-bound mines," or flying bombs tied to balloons which would target US warplanes heading to bomb Arab and Islamic countries.
In January, Yemen requested the arrest and extradition of Abu Hamza, claiming that he was involved in plotting terrorist acts there.
The third Islamist, Nigerian Frank Aytman, is said to be in charge of providing para-military training for British Muslims in Britain.
Police had asked the judge for permission to question the three men in order to hear from them their explanation concerning documents and papers seized during a dawn raid on their houses in March. The request was waived aside by the judge.
According to El-Serri's lawyer, the judge quashed the explanation order because it contravenes the European Treaty for Human Rights, and affirmed the suspects' right to remain silent.
Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly from his London-based office, El-Serri praised the court order, affirming that Islamists in Britain are protected by law, not the authorities. "Britain is a country in which the law prevails and the judiciary is respected," El-Serri said. "All citizens are equal. No one is above the law and laws are not tailored to please anybody, even the police." He added that there was no need for violence as long as human rights are respected.
The court's decision is considered the second setback to the anti-terrorism act passed last year which penalises the plotting of terrorist acts outside Britain. Three months ago, the court handed down another ruling in favour of three Algerians suspected of involvement in terrorism. The court said that proving guilt or innocence is the job of the police, not the suspects.
The latest court order was met with praise from the Islamists who considered it a precedent that can help their colleagues in similar cases.
During the court session, El-Serri said the judge questioned the legality of the act on whose basis the three were arrested briefly in March. He granted the prosecutor 90 minutes to discuss the matter with his colleagues, after which the judge remained unconvinced by the reasons for the police request.
Police have filed another explanation order for the three Islamists to question them on the 26th of this month. Police can either proceed with the order or drop it. According to El-Serri, the order is no longer a threat. "The court has already settled the issue," he explained. "Even if the police decided to summon us for questioning, we would use our right to remain silent," El-Serri said.
Although the police suffered a setback, El-Serri conceded they did manage a victory of sorts. "Even if the police failed to press charges or condemn us, they still obtained information they could never have gotten, through the documents they seized from our homes," he said.
