‘Laws should not criminalise Muslims for thought crime’

Mohammed Atif Siddique, a student from Alva in Clackmannanshire, spoke out as he walked free from court yesterday after judges overturned his conviction on a terrorism charge.

The 24-year-old has already spent four years behind bars for other terrorist offences, but prosecutors said they would not seek a retrial on the main charge against him – that he possessed articles with "a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism".

He was convicted in 2007 of two charges under the Terrorism Act 2000, one under the Terrorism Act 2006, and one breach of the peace, all related to viewing and disseminating information online.

In a statement read outside the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh by his solicitor, Aamer Anwar, Mr Siddique said: "Our laws should bring to account those who plan acts of terror and not criminalise young Muslims for thought crime and possession of propaganda.

"I have always maintained my innocence but they took my liberty, destroyed my family’s reputation and labelled me a terrorist.

"I never had any bombs or plans to hurt anyone. In court it was said I was a wannabe suicide bomber, but I have always said I was simply looking for answers on the internet."

He added: "I am grateful to those who supported me. I just want to go home now and live my life in peace."

Our laws should bring to account those who plan acts of terror and not criminalise young Muslims for thought crime and possession of propaganda. I am grateful to those who supported me. I just want to go home now and live my life in peace Mohammed Atif Siddique

But while his lawyer hailed the verdict as a victory for freedom of speech and a blow against injustice, the Crown Office scotched celebrations by reminding the world that Siddique still stands convicted of serious offences under the 2006 and 2000 terrorism Acts.

A statement from the Crown said it would not be in the public interest to retry him for the crime of which he was cleared because he has already served a significant sentence for the others.

Despite the latest ruling, his convictions for setting up bomb-making websites and distributing terrorist propaganda remain in force, as does a separate breach of the peace ruling imposed after he showed videos of beheadings to classmates at Glasgow’s Metropolitan College.

The case of 24-year-old Mr Siddique, a shopkeeper’s son from a small central Scotland town, sparked vigorous debate about what constituted "thought crime" and what posed a real risk to the public.

Mr Siddique and his lawyers argued that he was just a young man, aged 20 at the time of his crimes, who sated an interest in terrorism and extremist Islam by looking at websites.

Much of the material was freely available online, his legal team said, and Donald Findlay QC – representing Mr Siddique alongside Mr Anwar – argued that the original judge, Lord Carloway, had failed to inform the jury that a connection must be established between the materials possessed and a specific act of terrorism.

The former student was portrayed as a foolish youth who had grown infatuated with dangerous literature, rather than a cold-blooded terrorist who would murder fellow Scots.

His appeal was based on a "material misdirection" identified in the original trial by three judges. They found that Lord Carloway’s explanation of the Terrorism Act 2000 was unsatisfactory, and misled the jury.

Mr Anwar was rebuked after the first trial for "angry and petulant" comments in which he condemned the hearing as "a tragedy for justice and free speech" and referred to proceedings as "farcical". He was cleared of contempt of court, however, and yesterday repeated his earlier comments.

Mr Siddique’s interpretation of Islam was called into question by Scottish Islamic Foundation leader Osama Saeed, however, who offered to meet him to discuss ideas and "present a mainstream picture" of the religion.

Mr Saeed also called for a clearer explanation by police and Government of "the line between someone looking at things on the internet and having the possibility of being talked away from extreme ideas, and the point at which they move into criminality".

"We are extremely concerned by reports that there was little attempt whilst in prison to discuss with him the extreme ideas that he had been influenced by on the internet," he said.

Other victims of the UK’s war on terror

• Mohammed Atif Siddique is not the only person to fall victim to errors in Britain’s handling of suspected terrorist cases.

• Jean Charles de Menezes Gunned down by armed police officers who feared he was a suicide bomber as he boarded a tube train in London in 2005. The Brazilian electrician was shot in the head seven times by a Metropolitan Police specialist firearms team during the aftermath of the 7/7 London bombings. An inquest returned an open verdict in December 2008, but the case has been held up by opponents of stricter anti-terrorist laws as an example of authorities getting it wrong.
• Two Muslim brothers were released without charge after police officers wrongly stormed their home in Forest Gate, east London, and shot one in the chest at close range during a 2006 anti-terror operation.

• Mohammed Abdul Kahar and his brother, Abul Koyair, were woken at 4am by armed officers breaking in to their home to search for chemical weapons workshop. Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman apologised, but said police had no choice but to mount the operation after they received information.
• The Home Office last year dropped attempts to deport Mohammed Asha, a Jordanian doctor cleared of involvement in the Glasgow and London bomb plots. Dr Asha, an NHS neurologist, stood trial with the men who carried out attempted bomb attacks on Glasgow Airport and London’s West End in June 2007, but was cleared. He said the allegations had "obliterated" his life and accused the Government of "sour grapes" when it tried to deport him.

Posted February 09, 2010, Herald Scotland