Channel 4 rejects claim that mother was paid for documentary

CHANNEL 4 last night denied claims by a jihadi bride in a refugee camp that her mother was paid to help with a documentary about her daughter.

The woman – who we have called Rachel to protect her identity – made the allegation during an interview with The Mail on Sunday in the Al-Roj camp in northern Syria last week.

She declined to give further details. Channel 4 said a production company had worked on a project about jihadi brides, but it had been cancelled and no payment was made to the mother.

The Isis bride, a mother-of-three and of British-Trinidadian origin, is fighting a legal battle to come back to the UK after she was stripped of her British citizenship by the Government.

She said: ‘My mum, she signed a contract with Channel 4 and because she signed a contract with Channel 4, I’m not allowed to give [interviews] to anyone. My mum, she’s signed this and they give her money. She said to me,

‘I can’t talk to you on record because of this contract’

“If the BBC comes, you don’t give them [an interview] because of Channel 4.” ’

Rachel, who even suggested that a film crew was scheduled to fly to Syria to interview her, added: ‘Because she signed this Channel 4 [contract] I think it will breach her contract [by speaking to the MoS]. I don’t have a problem talking with you. But on record, mushkilah [problem].’

TV regulator Ofcom prohibits broadcasters from paying a convicted or confessed criminal, but this does not apply to their relatives. However, Rachel admitted visiting a camp ‘hawala’ money shop – part of a network of people who transfer cash – which suggests that she might have received funds from her mother.

Last night, a Channel 4 spokesman said: ‘We are aware of a development by a production company in this area about 18 months ago which did not proceed. No payments were made.’

Rules on payments are stricter for newspapers. They are not allowed for ‘stories, pictures or information which seek to exploit a particular crime or to glorify or glamorise crime in general’ and must not be made directly ‘to convicted or confessed criminals or to their associates, who may include family, friends and colleagues’.