Charges against jihadists being left to ‘lie on file’
Patrick Sawer, Robert Mendick, Rhodri Morgan and Hayley Dixon PROSECUTORS are allowing dozens of charges brought against terrorists to “lie on file” amid claims jihadists are “going unpunished” for serious offences.
An analysis by a think tank suggests more than 40 convicted terrorists were sentenced for fewer offences than they were originally charged with.
Critics accused the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) of striking a series of plea-bargaining deals that may mean terrorists have served shorter sentences. The CPS denied the claims and insisted allowing charges to lie on file was common practice.
The controversial deals include a terror suspect who admitted being a member of al-Qaeda but had charges of encouraging other Muslims to kill Gordon Brown and Tony Blair laid on file, meaning he was not convicted of that offence.
The row comes as the Government is attempting to rush through legislation to prevent the early release of convicted jihadists.
Ministers are considering forcing terrorists to sign an offenders list on release from prison. The register would work in a similar way to the process used for sex offenders.
It emerged that the Islamist fanatic who carried out last Sunday’s Streatham attack had only served half his sentence for possession of terrorism-related documents.
While Sudesh Amman was originally arrested in May 2018 for preparing acts of terrorism, he was subsequently charged with the lesser offences of possessing and disseminating terrorist materials. When Amman was sentenced in December 2018 to three months and four years after pleading guilty to a number of charges of possession, three further charges were left on file.
Despite his early release he was considered so dangerous that he was being watched round the clock by armed police. Officers shot him dead less than a minute after he began stabbing pedestrians, injuring two.
An analysis by the Henry Jackson Society in conjunction with The Telegraph has found that Amman was one of at least 42 individuals since 1998 sentenced for terrorism offences who pleaded guilty to certain charges while others offences were not pursued by the CPS.
Those left on file would not have been considered by the judge for the purposes of sentencing because they would not have been convicted of those offences. At least 10 of those who had charges against them laid on file after pleading guilty to other offences went on to commit further terror crimes, or travelled abroad to join foreign terror groups such as Isil or al-Shabaab, on being released from prison.
Alan Mendoza, executive director of the Henry Jackson Society, said: “The CPS now need to explain why it was felt necessary to make these deals to jihadists.”
The CPS denied the allegations. A CPS spokesman said: “We always prosecute terrorists for the most serious offences possible based on the available evidence to give the court sufficient sentencing powers.
“We only allow less serious offences to lie on file where the criminal behaviour is covered by more serious charges and where there would be no difference to the sentence passed.
“This is in no way a ‘deal’ – we lay the facts of the offending before the court and the decision whether to allow some counts to lie on file is ultimately made by the judge.”