| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| 200 al-Qaeda alumni in the UK |
| 2005-04-14 |
| IF THOSE involved in prosecuting the war on terror take any satisfaction from the capture of the man known to them as Kamel Bourgass, then it must be tempered with the knowledge that the case raises more questions than it answers about the progress of that war. After an investigation that involved 800 officers drawn from Scotland Yard, other British forces and the security services, even the identity of the man in the dock remained uncertain. So too did his intentions. Before passing sentence, Mr Justice Penry-Davey asked Nigel Sweeney, QC, prosecuting: "Has it been possible in the course of this investigation to establish this man's true identity?" Mr Sweeney replied that he was "hesitant" on the issue. "It has been our case that if he is anybody, he is Nadir Habra, not Kamel Bourgass. That's our position," he said. There were raids and searches at 72 locations in Bournemouth, Norfolk, Doncaster, London and Manchester, as well as police investigations in Algeria, France, Italy, Holland, Belgium, Spain, the United States, Canada, Georgia, Ireland, Germany, China, Portugal, Morocco, Switzerland and Austria. Yet Peter Clarke, the head of Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Branch, could only speculate yesterday about what the ricin would have been used for. Possibly in London, but maybe elsewhere; smeared on door handles, or used in some other way. If that failed to instil confidence in the public, what the case revealed about the ease with which terrorists could enter the UK was, if anything, likely to be more disturbing. The man known as Bourgass and others made a mockery of Britain's asylum system. He had at least four false identities and was first recorded as being in the UK when he applied for asylum three years before he killed Detective Constable Stephen Oake. He entered the country hidden in the back of a lorry and when his asylum applications failed, he simply switched identities. Mr Justice Penry-Davey said what the case did demonstrate "very clearly" was "the scale on which false passports are available and being used". Lord Stevens, the former commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, recently warned that up to 200 graduates of al-Qaeda's Afghan camps might still be in the country, and a police source admitted: "It's a large network, and I think it would be foolhardy to say we have damaged it beyond repair." But it is not just terrorists coming from abroad that are causing concern. Security services say the next wave will come in the form of young, home-grown radicals who feel alienated by the country in which they are living - and there are a number of trials of UK citizens pending. They also remain convinced that terrorists are actively attempting to acquire unconventional weapons. "There is no doubt that they are attempting to get weapons of mass destruction and we have little doubt that they will use them," one senior US State Department official said. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #7 the old chinese way. What was that, JFM? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-04-14 11:03:03 PM |
| #6 Nope. During investigation there is something called the "juge d'instruction" supervising teh action of the police or who is the guy who signs teh orders for jailing during investigation or paroling. This special judge is supposed to seek the truth ie investigate both the clues hinting the suspect is innocent than thus hinting he is guilty. Even at the instruction stage the suspect can and must be assisted by a lawyer. Some people think that this system tends to lead the judge to be carried by the "hunting instinct" and thus looking primarily towards how to nail the suspect instead of looking in both directions: trying to find evidence for innocence and guiltiness. Once the instruction is over and if there is enough proof the accusee goes to a court presided by one or three judges with an accuser and a defender. At this stage it looks more like an american court except that the judges are more active than in the american system (at times they interrogate directly the witnesses) and that they are members of the jury (three judges against six citizens). I am not fond of this but it is better than the old chinese way. |
| Posted by: JFM 2005-04-14 4:56:21 PM |
| #5 JFM: The reason is that after the GIA bombings in 1995 authorities are alert against islamic terrorists and also because France has legislation (and judges willing to enforce it) who puts the Patriot Act at a shame. Is it true that French magistrates are both judge and defense lawyer? (Come to think of it, just like Chinese magistrates of antiquity). |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-04-14 2:31:39 PM |
| #4 BH you are wrong: Peruse the litterature about the subject and you will notice that France ia marked as a "to be avoided" territory by Al Quaida types. The reason is that after the GIA bombings in 1995 authorities are alert against islamic terrorists and also because France has legislation (and judges willing to enforce it) who puts the Patriot Act at a shame. BTW a frequent complaint of anti-terrorist French cops has been the leniency of British authorities and them granting asylum towards people there were solid proofs against. |
| Posted by: JFM 2005-04-14 12:56:23 PM |
| #3 The British immigration/asylum system has to be one of the weakest links in the War on Terror. In terms of gaping vulnerability, the U.S./Mexican border isn't that far behind. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-04-14 10:14:02 AM |
| #2 Not to mention the French, Canadian, and Mexican systems. |
| Posted by: BH 2005-04-14 10:13:14 AM |
| #1 The British immigration/asylum system has to be one of the weakest links in the War on Terror. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2005-04-14 8:21:14 AM |