News / Human Rights

Terror suspect has tag removed

Saturday, 20 June 2015 2:04 PM [ Last Update: Saturday, 20 June 2015 2:05 PM ]

A Somali refugee accused of being a recruiter for Al-Shabaab is to have his electronic tag removed to save his sanity.

A Somalian refugee, who is accused of being a recruiting agent for a terror group, has his electronic tag removed because he believes it is a bomb.
The 39-year-old imam known only as DD, is one of two suspects subject to a terrorism prevention and investigation measure (Tpim), which
required him to wear a monitoring tag.
Lawyers for DD told the high court that his tag breached the European convention on human rights because he feared it is a bomb containing a
camera.
The high court ruled in his favour, despite security services strong suspicions against him. Lawyers for the home secretary, Theresa May, told the court there was evidence he had provided vital support for Somali militant group al-Shabaab for a number of years, including recruiting “young and vulnerable individuals from Europe”.
Jonathan Hall QC said the advice from the security service was that the Tpim had “significantly reduced DD’s ability to spread propaganda,
radicalise, recruit and fundraise”.

But Mr Justice Collins said the tag must be removed to prevent a further deterioration in the suspect’s mental health. The judge
pointed towards medical evident that the man had psychotic and unusual beliefs that the tag was there to punish him.
Two doctors confirmed the legitimacy of his symptoms and said it could lead to self-harm. This then suggested the tag a breach of article
three of the European convention on human rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment.
“Since the appellant has the delusion that there is a bomb in his tag, which will be detonated so that MI5 can kill him if a judge allows his
appeal, great care should be taken with the removal of the tag. It may be considered sensible not to inform him of my decision that the tag must go, until on some pretext the tag has been removed,” Collins said.

A Home Office spokesman said: “We are disappointed with the verdict of the court that certain restrictions to which the individual was
subject should be removed. But the court found there was sufficient evidence to support the national security case to impose and keep in place a Tpim notice and restrictions on this individual’s activities to protect the public remain in place.”
SU/MH