UK: Samar and Jawad given leave to appeal
01 May 1999
Samar Alami and Jawad Botmeh were given leave to appeal against their 1996 convictions for conspiring to cause explosions at the Israeli embassy and Balfour House at the Court of Appeal on May 10. Samar and Jawad, who have always protested their innocence, were jailed for 20 years after a trial at which crucial evidence was "buried" and withheld from the defence, leading to claims that they had been the victims of a miscarriage of justice. Their case has received widespread support from MPs, lawyers and community groups in the UK, and human rights organisations worldwide; over 2,500 letters of support were sent from the West Bank and Gaza to the Home Secretary, Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney general in March (see Statewatch vol 9 no 1).
Supporters of the Freedom and Justice for Samar and Jawad campaign picketed a "closed" Public Interest Immunity (PII) hearing on March 15 and Samar and Jawad's application for leave to appeal their convictions at the Court of Appeal on March 29 and 30. The appeal hearing allowed solicitors to voice their concerns about the non-disclosure of material and the use of PII certificates which had been used before and during the trial. Their solicitor's arguments turned around Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (which guarantees a "fair and pubic hearing"), and depended on the Appeal Court taking on board the opinion of the European Commission of Human Rights in the Rowe and Johnson (the M25 case, see article in policing section) case on the non-disclosure of PII material. The European Commission's opinion is not (yet) binding on British courts, but the Appeal Court found that evidence held by the intelligence services had been withheld by the prosecution in a way that could amount to a breach of Article 6.
Much of the suppressed evidence relates to information disclosed by former MI5 agent David Shayler a year after the trial, which contradicts evidence presented to the jury. Shayler alleges that MI5 received a report giving prior knowledge of the bombings, and which indicated that they were not carried out by the defendants, but failed to act on it. He also referred to an MI6 report which expressed the view that: "...the Israeli's had carried out the attack on their own embassy to embarrass the British government into providing them with more security" and as part of an ongoing feud between Israeli and British intelligence services.
The Scott inquiry, which was set up by the governmant in 1992, made the following recommendation on the use of PII in its report:
"The balance must always come down in favour of disclosure if there is any real possibility that the withholding of the document may cause or contribute to a miscarriage of justice. The public interest factors underlying the PII claim cannot ever have a weight sufficient to outweigh that possibility..."
The Shaylor material, which contradicts the evidence on which Samar and Jawad were convicted by pointing to the involvement of parties other than the defendants, has been with the government, prosecution service and the police since 1994. The fact that this information was withheld from the defence points to a clear miscarriage of justice. Shayler's evidence, and other information that has come to light since the trial, should be tested by the courts, as the Appeal Court has indicated. A date has yet to be fixed for Samar and Jawad's appeal, but it is expected to take place later this year.
The Freedom and Justice for Samar and Jawad campaign have published a book, Justice Denied: Unanswered Questions in the bombing of the Israeli Emabassy and Balfour House by Daniel Guedalla, it can be obtained from the campaign at BOX BM FOSA, London WC1N 3XX. The campaign can be contacted by e-mail: postmaster@freesaj.org.uk.