Connect with us

Published

on

Prison officers should be armed with lethal weapons to crack down on Islamist terrorists in jail, the shadow justice secretary has said.

Highly trained teams should also be equipped with tasers, stun grenades and baton rounds to tackle dangerous criminals in high-security jails, Robert Jenrick said.

The plan is taken from a series of recommendations by counter-extremism expert and former prison governor Ian Acheson.

It comes after a prison officer at high-security prison Long Lartin in Worcestershire was stabbed on Friday morning with a weapon Sky News understands was brought in from outside the prison.

It also follows several attacks on prison officers in jails.

In April this year, the Manchester Arena bomb plotter, Hashem Abedi, allegedly assaulted prison staff by throwing hot oil on them and then launching a stabbing attack, injuring three officers.

At Belmarsh prison, Southport killer Axel Rudakubana has been accused of throwing boiling water over an officer through the hatch in his cell door earlier this month.

A prison wall. Pic: PA
Image:
File pic: PA

Mr Jenrick said: “Islamist gangs and violent prisoners in our jails are out of control.

It’s a national security emergency, but the government is dithering. If they don’t act soon, there is a very real risk that a prison officer is kidnapped or murdered in the line of duty, or that a terrorist attack is directed from inside prison.”

He said he commissioned Mr Acheson to conduct a rapid review into measures the government could adopt.

The measures include removing all radical Islamist imams working in prisons, immediately rolling out high-collar stab vests to frontline officers, and mandating the quarterly release of data on religious conversions in prison and faith-based incidents.

It also recommended legislating to overturn the De Silva ruling to strip back judicial interference in operational decisions by governors to isolate extremists.

Mr Jenrick added: “We have to stop pussy-footing around Islamist extremists and violent offenders in jails.

“That means arming specialist prison officer teams with tasers and stun grenades, as well as giving them access to lethal weapons in exceptional circumstances.

“If prison governors can’t easily keep terrorist influencers and radicalising inmates apart from the mainstream prisoners they target, then we don’t control our prisons – they do. We must take back control and restore order by giving officers the powers and protection they need.”

Mr Acheson said: “Too often what goes wrong behind the walls of our high security jails passes unnoticed, as does the bravery of the men and women in uniform who deal every day with terrorists and other highly dangerous offenders.

“Robert Jenrick is right – the threat to officer safety is now intolerable and must be met decisively by the government.

“The balance inside too many of our prisons has shifted away from control by the state to mere containment and the price is soaring levels of staff assaults and wrecked rehabilitation. Broken officers can’t help fix broken people – or protect the public from violent extremism.”

A Ministry of Justice source said: “The government considers the introduction of lethal weapons into prisons would put prison officers at greater risk.”

They added: “The last government added just 500 cells to our prison estate, and left our jails in total crisis. In 14 years, they closed 1,600 cells in the high-security estate, staff assaults soared, and experienced officers left in droves. Now the arsonists are pretending to be firefighters.

“This government is cleaning up the mess the last government left behind. We are building new prisons, with 2,400 new cells opened since we took office. And we take a zero-tolerance approach to violence and extremism inside.”

Continue Reading

Politics

US Supreme Court will not review IRS case involving Coinbase user data

Published

on

By

US Supreme Court will not review IRS case involving Coinbase user data

US Supreme Court will not review IRS case involving Coinbase user data

A lower court ruling will stand in a case involving a Coinbase user who filed a lawsuit against the IRS after the crypto exchange turned over transaction data.

Continue Reading

Politics

First US staking ETF to launch Wednesday, giving investors exposure to Solana

Published

on

By

First US staking ETF to launch Wednesday, giving investors exposure to Solana

First US staking ETF to launch Wednesday, giving investors exposure to Solana

REX Shares will launch the first US staked crypto ETF this week, giving investors direct exposure to SOL with staking rewards.

Continue Reading

Politics

Government accused of ‘stark’ contradiction over position on Gaza genocide allegations

Published

on

By

Government accused of 'stark' contradiction over position on Gaza genocide allegations

The government has won a long-running legal challenge about its decision to continue allowing the sale of spare parts for F-35 fighter jets to Israel, while suspending other arms licences over concerns about international humanitarian law in Gaza.

But a key part of its case has highlighted mixed messaging about its position on the risk of genocide in Gaza – and intensified calls for ministers to publish their own assessment on the issue.

PM braced for pivotal vote – politics latest

Lawyers acting for the government told judges “the evidence available does not support a finding of genocide” and “the government assessment was that…there was no serious risk of genocide occurring”.

Therefore, they argued, continuing to supply the F-35 components did not put the UK at risk of breaching the Genocide Convention.

This assessment has never been published or justified by ministers in parliament, despite numerous questions on the issue.

Some MPs argue its very existence contrasts with the position repeatedly expressed by ministers in parliament – that the UK is unable to give a view on allegations of genocide in Gaza, because the question is one for the international courts.

For example, just last week Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner told PMQs “it is a long-standing principle that genocide is determined by competent international courts and not by governments”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Situation in Gaza ‘utterly intolerable’

‘The UK cannot sit on our hands’

Green MP Ellie Chowns said: “The government insists only an international court can judge whether genocide is occurring in Gaza, yet have somehow also concluded there is ‘no serious risk of genocide’ in Gaza – and despite my urging, refuse to publish the risk assessments which lead to this decision.

“Full transparency on these risk assessments should not be optional; it is essential for holding the government to account and stopping further atrocity.

“While Labour tie themselves in knots contradicting each other, families are starving, hospitals lie in ruins, and children are dying.

“The UK cannot sit on our hands waiting for an international court verdict when our legal duty under the Genocide Convention compels us to prevent genocide from occurring, not merely seek justice after the fact.”

‘Why are these assessments being made?’

“This contradiction at the heart of the government’s position is stark,” said Zarah Sultana MP, an outspoken critic of Labour’s approach to the conflict in Gaza, who now sits as an independent after losing the party whip last summer.

“Ministers say it’s not for them to determine genocide, that only international courts can do so. Yet internal ‘genocide assessments’ have clearly been made and used to justify continuing arms exports to Israel.

“If they have no view, why are these assessments being made? And if they do, why refuse to share them with parliament? This Labour government, in opposition, demanded the Tories publish their assessments. Now in office, they’ve refused to do the same.”

Read more:
‘All I see is blood’
‘It felt like earthquakes’
MPs want Ukraine-style scheme for Gazans

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Routes for Palestinians ‘restricted’

Judges at the High Court ultimately ruled the case was over such a “sensitive and political issue” it should be a matter for the government, “which is democratically accountable to parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not the court”.

Dearbhla Minogue, a senior lawyer at the Global Legal Action Network, and a solicitor for Al-Haq, the Palestinian human rights group which brought the case, said: “This should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the government, but rather a restrained approach to the separation of powers.

“The government’s disgraceful assessment that there is no risk of genocide has therefore evaded scrutiny in the courts, and as far as we know it still stands.”

Palestinians inspect the damage at an UNRWA school sheltering displaced people that was hit in an Israeli air strike, in Gaza.
Pic Reuters
A Palestinian woman sits amid the damage at an UNRWA school sheltering displaced people. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Pics: Reuters

What is the government’s position?

Government lawyers argued the decision not to ban the export of F-35 parts was due to advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the whole F-35 programme and have a “profound impact on international peace and security”.

The UK supplies F-35 component parts as a member of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets. As a customer of that programme, Israel can order from the pool of spare parts.

Labour MP Richard Burgon said the ruling puts the government under pressure to clarify its position.

“This court ruling is very clear: only the government and parliament can decide if F-35 fighter jet parts – that can end up in Israel – should be sold,” he said.

“So the government can no longer pass the buck: it can stop these exports, or it can be complicit in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

“On many issues they say it’s not for the government to decide, but it’s one for the international courts. This washing of hands will no longer work.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Dozens dead in Gaza after Israeli strikes

Israel has consistently rejected any allegations of genocide.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu branded a recent UN report on the issue biased and antisemitic.

“Instead of focusing on the crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by the Hamas terrorist organisation… the United Nations once again chooses to attack the state of Israel with false accusations,” he said in a statement.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Gaza disinformation campaign is deliberate’

The UK government has not responded to requests for comment over its contrasting messaging to parliament and the courts over allegations of genocide.

But in response to the judgement, a spokesperson said: “The court has upheld this government’s thorough and lawful decision-making on this matter.

“This shows that the UK operates one of the most robust export control regimes in the world. We will continue to keep our defence export licensing under careful and continual review.

“On day one of this Government, the foreign secretary ordered a review into Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL).

“The review concluded that there was a clear risk that UK exports for the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) in the Gaza conflict might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of IHL.

“In contrast to the last government, we took decisive action, stopping exports to the Israeli Defence Forces that might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.”

Continue Reading

Trending