Kidnap case ‘halted over top-level concerns’
Detective claims inquiry into abduction of sheikh’s daughter was shut down to prevent ‘embarrassment’
THE British detective who investigated the abduction of the daughter of the ruler of Dubai believes his inquiry was halted to avoid any top-level “embarrassment”.
David Beck’s comments about the disappearance in England of the daughter of Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid al-maktoum came as Cambridgeshire police announced it would now “review aspects of the case”.
Mr Beck was a detective chief inspector when Princess Shamsa, 19, vanished while on a family summer holiday in 2000.
This week, Sir Andrew Mcfarlane, the President of the Family Division, found she was abducted by her father and flown to Dubai after she tried to flee from him. Shamsa, now 38, has not been seen since in public.
The role of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has come under intense scrutiny after Sir Andrew’s ruling catalogued how the department refused to release details it had about the police inquiry to lawyers representing the sheikh’s ex-wife, Princess Haya, as part of their ongoing custody battle over their two children.
Lawyers for the princess had claimed that the Foreign Office, then run by Robin Cook, the foreign secretary in Tony Blair’s Labour government, intervened to halt the police investigation. However, Sir Andrew concluded that the department did not stop the inquiry nor became involved following pressure from the sheikh.
Her legal team had also claimed a senior British diplomat approached Princess Haya’s brother, Prince Ali of Jordan, last year, “threatening, in effect, to render Her Royal Highness persona non grata”.
Mr Beck, who has claimed his police investigation was shut down by the Crown Prosecution Service without explanation, said he still had not been given access to the full file about the inquiry due to “significant sensitivities”.
“To me ‘significant sensitivities’ means someone is going to get embarrassed,” the retired officer said. “Personal embarrassment is not a reason for withholding the truth about the evidence. Had they said national security is at risk, then of course I may have considered [things] differently. They just said ‘significant sensitivities’.
“If you’re going to get embarrassed about what might come out, then I’m sorry, I don’t care.”
Asked during a visit to Riyadh how the findings might affect the UK’S business relations with Dubai, Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, said: “We’ll look at it very carefully before jumping to any conclusions.”
Last year, Charles Geekie QC told the London court Edward Oakden, the British ambassador to Jordan since 2015, made an “extraordinary intervention”, adding it “can only, we say, have come about as a result of pressure from Dubai”.
Meanwhile, Sir Andrew’s judgment also referred to an unnamed police force with “identified additional evidential material in its possession”, which could not be disclosed to lawyers on either side in the custody battle between the sheikh and the princess because it had been classified by public interest immunity.
The judge found the evidence was “not contrary” to the case and in fact “compatible” with one of the mother’s claims against the father, although he did not state which. As a result, the judge found it did not affect his “fact finding” process and there was no need to disclose it. A legal source said it was likely that the information was “sensitive
intelligence” that may have come from within the sheikh’s royal household or one of his employees.
Kate Allen, of Amnesty International UK, said that while it was important not to jump to conclusions, “the existence
‘If you’re going to get embarrassed about what might come out, then I’m sorry, I don’t care’
‘The existence of undisclosed secret evidence raises questions about the possible politicisation of decisions’
of further undisclosed secret evidence raises questions about the possible politicisation of decisions made in this troubling case.”
Ms Allen called on the Government to clarify “what, if any, involvement UK officials had in respect of this case”. She said: “No one is above the law, and Sheikh Mohammed – just like anyone else – should be fully investigated if there is credible evidence he is responsible for serious crimes on British soil.”
A spokesman for Cambridgeshire Police said the investigation was launched in 2001, but “insufficient evidence” resulted in no further action being taken. The case was then reviewed in 2017 with the same result.
Last night it was reported the Queen is to distance herself from the sheikh after the court judgment. The monarch, who has developed a relationship with the sheikh through their shared interest in racing, is expected to refuse to be photographed with him in public to avoid being dragged into the dispute.