Skip to main content

Government accused of putting lives at risk by sharing evidence with US that will lead to death penalty

WHITEHALL’S decision to provide evidence to the US on two suspected Isis terrorists without seeking assurances that they would not face the death penalty was “exceptional,” Supreme Court justices heard today.

El Shafee Elsheikh and Alexanda Kotey are accused of belonging to a brutal four-man cell of Isis executioners in Syria — nicknamed The Beatles because of their British accents — responsible for killing a number of high-profile Western captives.

Elsheikh’s mother Maha Elgizouli is challenging the decision of then home secretary Sajid Javid to share evidence with US authorities without seeking assurances that the men would not be executed if convicted in the US.

Home Office lawyers told a panel of seven justices that Mr Javid’s decision was made “after the most careful consideration.”

Sir James Eadie QC said in written submissions that the decision was taken in circumstances where the “only prospect of Elsheikh facing justice” was if he were tried by a federal court in the US.

He also said that the US administration had made it clear it was “strongly opposed” to Britain seeking a death penalty assurance.

He said: “It was an exceptional decision, taken after the most careful consideration by the then home secretary, having consulted with the then foreign secretary [Boris Johnson].”

Mr Eadie told the court that the activities of the so-called Beatles were among the very worst terrorism crimes imaginable and that they had posted footage of almost all of their 27 victims being beheaded online.

Human rights group Reprieve has intervened in the case, seeking to maintain Britain’s opposition to the death penalty.

Reprieve director Maya Foa said: “It is dangerously short-sighted to abandon a principled British position, that we’ve held for over half a century, because President Trump might take offence.

“This decision sends a clear message that the UK government’s opposition to the death penalty is not categorical.

“By abandoning its abolitionist stance, the UK government is undermining its own efforts to prevent the use of the death penalty across the world.

“Left as it is, this decision will have devastating impacts for people — including British people — facing execution around the world. Principles can’t be jettisoned when they become politically inconvenient.”

OWNED BY OUR READERS

We're a reader-owned co-operative, which means you can become part of the paper too by buying shares in the People’s Press Printing Society.

 

 

Become a supporter

Fighting fund

You've Raised:£ 13,288
We need:£ 4,712
3 Days remaining
Donate today