The verdict on whether a police Production Order should be served on journalist Shiv Malik will not be revealed until next Monday, Index has learned.
Journalist Shiv Malik is appearing in court this morning after Greater Manchester Police requested a Production Order for materials relating to his forthcoming book, Leaving Al-Qaeda.
Malik, who is co-writing the book with former Islamist Hassan Butt, received notice of the order last week. Police are requesting copies of the book, along with any notes and audiovisual recordings Malik and Butt may have made. Police say there are ‘reasonable grounds for believing that it is in the public interest that the Greater Manchester Police Counter Terrorism Unit has access to [the] material’, as it may ‘demonstrate Hassan Butt’s role and activities in facilitating support for individuals fighting coalition forces in Afghanistan’.
Yesterday’s overturning of the convictions of five young men under the Terrorism Act signifies a change in how the courts deal with extremism, writes Jo Glanville
The quashing of the conviction of five students under the Terrorism Act at the Court of Appeal this week marks a sea change. The main evidence against the five young men (one of whom was a schoolboy at the time of his arrest) was the extremist material they had downloaded and shared on the Internet. They were prosecuted under Section 57 of the Terrorism Act 2000 for possessing articles for the purposes of terrorism.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal revealed that Section 57 was designed to allow action to be taken against people found in possession of bomb-making material – in circumstances where there was a reasonable suspicion of a connection with terrorism. The material the young men had downloaded was described variously as propagandist, extremist and ideological. It was not material that contained instructions on how to make weapons or explosives. However the prosecution argued that the students were planning to travel to Pakistan, where they were going to train and then fight against the government in Afghanistan: this was the terrorist purpose for which they had downloaded material from the Internet. The Court of Appeal ruled that there was no direct connection between the material and a terrorist plan: the evidence did not support the case.
It is a judgment that breaks the link (which until now has gone virtually unquestioned) between extremism and terrorism. The Internet is seen as the hub of extremist activity – an underworld of activity that must be controlled. Jihadi material is viewed as such a toxic force that viewing it – “possessing” it – has become a criminal act. The Court of Appeal has poured cold water on these assumptions and demanded a much more rigorous, restricted interpretation of the law. The public response to the Samina Malik case last year marked the first shift in attitude towards extremist literature and any connection with terrorism. The Court of Appeal has now fundamentally called into question the application of the law.
Further reading from Index on Censorship Dec 2007 (pdfs)
Road to Jihad – Shiraz Maher
Taking on the radicals – David Livingstone
Five young British men who were convicted after being found in possession of jihadist literature have won their appeal against the decision.