Javid tells US: We won’t block death penalty for Isil ‘Beatles’
British jihadists can face American justice after UK drops need for assurances they won’t be executed
BRITAIN has secretly abandoned its blanket opposition to the death penalty and to Guantánamo Bay in order to allow two notorious members of the “Beatles” group of Isil terrorists to be sent to America, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.
Documents seen by this newspaper reveal that the UK Government has agreed to hand over intelligence to help prosecute in the US courts the captured jihadists Alexanda Kotey and Shafee El-sheikh, who both held British citizenship.
In a letter sent by Sajid Javid to Jeff Sessions, the US Attorney General, the Home Secretary says Britain will demand no “assurances” that the pair will not be executed. Other documents say that British officials have also assessed that the pair may be sent to Guantánamo without trial and that such an outcome will not be formally opposed.
“I am of the view that there are strong reasons for not requiring a death penalty assurance in this specific case, so no such assurances will be sought,” said Mr Javid’s letter, dated June 22 2018. “I have instructed my officials to set out the terms of our assistance and to work with your officials to action the request. As you are aware, it is the long held position of the UK to seek death penalty assurances, and our decision in this case does not reflect a change in our policy on assistance in US death penalty cases generally, nor the UK Government’s stance on the global abolition of the death penalty.”
However, a senior Home Office source last night insisted the US had been verbally warned against sending the pair to Guantánamo. The source said: “We have proactively made it clear to the US that while we will share for the purposes of a criminal trial we will not for Guantánamo Bay.”
The jihadist group known as the “Beatles” was one of Isil’s most notorious cells. The name came from the fact its four members had British accents. The terror cell was behind the beheadings of US journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, British aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning, and US humanitarian worker Peter Kassig. It also held more than 20 Western hostages in Syria in 2014 and 2015, torturing many.
Mohammed Emwazi, who became known as “Jihadi John”, was identified as the group’s leader and was killed by a drone strike in Syria in 2015. Aine Lesley Davis, the third member, was last year tried in Turkey and jailed for seven and a half years. Kotey and Elsheikh were captured in January 2018 while trying to flee as anti-isil forces swept through Syria. They are being held by the Us-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Both men had British citizenship, but it has been widely reported that this was secretly revoked. The leaked documents seen by The
Daily Telegraph reveal that the Metropolitan Police and FBI have been investigating the two men’s activities in Syria for the past four years, collecting more than 600 witness statements in a criminal inquiry involving 14 other countries. Mr Javid said there was “intelligence” implicating the two men in the “kidnap and murder” of two British citizens and three Americans.
However, despite repeated ministerial assurances that British jihadists travelling to Syria would be held to account in British courts, the Home Secretary’s letter discloses concerns that laws in this country may not be robust enough to ensure a successful prosecution. He believes American terrorism laws are more effective.
In his letter, Mr Javid expresses concerns of the Crown Prosecuton Service over possible attempts to undermine and divert a UK case with abuse of process arguments over extradition routes.
The letter states: “In light of this, the UK does not currently intend to request, nor actively encourage, the transfer of Kotey and El-sheikh to the UK to support a future Uk-based prosecution. I do understand your frustration on this subject … we in the UK are introducing new legislation to improve the range of offences on the statute book going forward, to deal with the scourge of foreign fighters.
“Ensuring foreign fighters face justice raises a real challenge for all our jurisdictions, however in this instance we believe that a successful federal prosecution in the US is more likely to be possible because of differences in your statute book and the restrictions on challenges to the route by which defendants appear in US courts.
“The US currently has additional charges for terrorism offences which are not available under UK criminal law, and those offences carry long sentences.”
The decision is likely to trigger a backlash from human rights groups. Some family members of victims killed by the group also oppose them being executed or going to Guantánamo.
The Home Secretary is likely to be called before Parliament as early as today to justify the decision.
A Government source familiar with the decision said: “This has the potential to be a political nightmare. There are going to be a lot of angry MPS opposed to the idea of British intelligence sending British citizens potentially to their death or to permanent incarceration.”
Britain has had to pay millions of pounds in compensation to British na-
tionals or citizens who were held in Guantánamo Bay after being captured in foreign war zones amid allegations this country’s intelligence services were complicit in their detention without trial.
The letter from Mr Javid makes no mention of Guantánamo. However, a UK Government document dated the same day and circulated to key civil servants offers a more candid explanation. This newspaper has seen a copy of the briefing, marked “official sensitive”, which says twice that UK ministers have decided to share evidence with the US on the two jihadists “without seeking death penalty assurances”.
Under a section headed “Guantánamo Bay”, it says: “If the US deems a federal prosecution not possible, they might seek transfer of Kotey and Elsheikh to Guantánamo Bay [GTMO].
“Although HMG [Her Majesty’s Government] will not lobby the US to not send them to GTMO, we will maintain our long-standing position that GTMO should close.
“GTMO is seen by many as acting as a recruiting sergeant for extremists intent on undermining Western values.”
It adds: “There are also wider reputational risks of HMG seemingly undermining our publicly stated desire to see GTMO closed and failing to assist in securing justice.”
The acknowledgement that both men could be sent to Guantánamo, while noting that ministers will not lobby against the move, is likely to be jumped on by human rights activists.
The briefing document says that Mr Javid and Boris Johnson, then foreign secretary, made the call. However, it notes: “The Prime Minister is aware of this decision.” Explaining the decision, the document says: “They concluded that the risks associated with no prosecution being brought against Kotey and El-sheikh if UK evidence is not shared, outweigh the risks of direct UK assistance to a conviction that could lead to execution and the implications for the UK’S wider death penalty policy.”
The briefing document says that senior members of Donald Trump’s administration have “expressed frustration” about the UK Government trying to “dictate terms” for the pair’s possible trial in America.
In recent years Mrs May’s Government has made clear its opposition to the death penalty. “Overseas Security and Justice Assistance” guidance, produced by the Foreign Office last year, includes the line: “Written assurances should be sought before agreeing to the provision of assistance that anyone found guilty would not face the death penalty.”
Family members of victims of the jihadists have also opposed them getting the death penalty. Diane Foley, the mother of James Foley, told The Associated Press in March that such a move would feed their jihadist “desire for martyrdom and heroic afterlife”.
She added: “These men do not deserve that. They deserve to be held in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives.”