This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7242724.stm

The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 7 Version 8
Five students win terror appeal Five students win terror appeal
(about 1 hour later)
The convictions of five young Muslim men jailed over extremist literature have been quashed by the Appeal Court.The convictions of five young Muslim men jailed over extremist literature have been quashed by the Appeal Court.
Freeing the men, the Lord Chief Justice said their convictions for downloading extremist propaganda were unsafe as there was no proof of terrorist intent. Freeing the men, the Lord Chief Justice said there was no proof of terrorist intent. The lawyer for one said they had been jailed for a "thought crime".
A jury convicted the students in 2007 after hearing the men, of Bradford and Ilford, east London, became obsessed with jihadi websites and literature.A jury convicted the students in 2007 after hearing the men, of Bradford and Ilford, east London, became obsessed with jihadi websites and literature.
The lawyer for one said they had been jailed for a "thought crime". The Home Office said it would study the judgement carefully.
'Difficult questions' 'Serious threat'
In one of the first trials of its kind, Irfan Raja, Awaab Iqbal, Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Malik and Akbar Butt were jailed by an Old Bailey judge for downloading and sharing extremist terrorism-related material. The men all received sentences of between two and three years. It said it understood the Crown Prosecution Service was considering whether to appeal against the ruling, which it must do within seven days.
But at the Court of Appeal, Lord Phillips said the men had clearly downloaded extremist material but he doubted if there was evidence to support the prosecution's case that this was in relation to planning terrorist acts. It added that the threat of terrorism remained serious and real and the government was committed to ensuring it had the strongest possible anti-terrorism legal framework.
READ THE LETTER class="" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/13_02_08_rajaletter1.pdf">Mohammed Irfan Raja's letter to his parents which alerted the police [1.1MB] Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader href="http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html">Download the reader here Young Muslim men before this judgement could have been prosecuted simply for simply looking at any material on the basis that it might be connected in some way to terrorist purposes Imran Khan
"Difficult questions of interpretation have been raised in this case by the attempt by the prosecution to use [this law] for a purpose for which it was not intended," he said. Irfan Raja, Awaab Iqbal, Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Malik and Akbar Butt were jailed for between two and three years each by the Old Bailey for downloading and sharing extremist terrorism-related material, in what was one of the first cases of its kind.
Lawyers for the five men say the decision to restrict how the law on extremist literature works has huge implications for counter terrorism prosecutions. But at the Court of Appeal, Lord Phillips said that while the men had downloaded such material, he doubted if there was evidence this was in relation to planning terrorist acts.
Critics inside the Muslim community and civil liberty campaigners say section 57 of 2000 Terrorism Act has been used as a blunt instrument to prosecute young Muslim men where there is no proof of genuine links to terrorism. He said the prosecution had attempted to use the law for a purpose for which it was not intended.
The BBC understands there have been three other convictions under this legislation - but a string of related cases are expected before the courts this year. 'Huge implications'
The government has seven days in which to decide whether to appeal against the ruling. Lawyers for the men say the decision to restrict how the law on extremist literature works has huge implications for counter terrorism prosecutions.
Imran Khan, solicitor for Mr Zafar, said they had been prosecuted for "thought crime". Critics inside the Muslim community and civil liberty campaigners say section 57 of the 2000 Terrorism Act has been used as a blunt instrument to prosecute young Muslim men where there is no proof of genuine links to terrorism.
And in a statement released through his solicitors, Mr Malik said he had always maintained his innocence and had been vindicated by the Lord Chief Justice. The BBC understands there have been three other convictions under this legislation - more cases are expected before the courts this year.
Imran Khan, solicitor for Mr Zafar, said the five had been prosecuted for "thought crime" and that the ruling would have an significant impact.
It must go out to other young people that it is a dangerous area, and they have to keep themselves far, far away from visiting these websites Dr Ghayasudin Siddiqui
He told BBC News: "Young Muslim men before this judgement could have been prosecuted simply for simply looking at any material on the basis that it might be connected in some way to terrorist purposes."
He said section 57 of the 2000 Terrorism Act had been written in such wide terms that "effectively, anybody could have been caught in it" but prosecutors would now have to prove such material was intended for terrorist purposes.
'Unknown students'
In a statement released through his solicitors, Mr Malik said he had always maintained his innocence.
"It is a great thing to live in a country where the Lord Chief Justice takes the time from hearing important cases to see if a group of unknown students have been fairly convicted for reading the wrong kind of literature," he said."It is a great thing to live in a country where the Lord Chief Justice takes the time from hearing important cases to see if a group of unknown students have been fairly convicted for reading the wrong kind of literature," he said.
"As I said when I was arrested, I do not, have not and will not support terrorism in any form against innocent people."As I said when I was arrested, I do not, have not and will not support terrorism in any form against innocent people.
READ THE LETTER Mohammed Irfan Raja's letter to his parents which alerted the police [1.1MB] Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader Download the reader here
"My prosecution was a test case under the 2000 Terrorism Act. Today's decision means no first year student can ever be prosecuted again under this Act for possessing extremist literature.""My prosecution was a test case under the 2000 Terrorism Act. Today's decision means no first year student can ever be prosecuted again under this Act for possessing extremist literature."
Mr Malik's solicitor, Saghir Hussein, said it was a "landmark judgement", with implications for other cases, including those alleging glorification of terrorism.
Zahid Iqbal, father of Awaab Iqbal, said he was feeling "great" after the decision.
"Justice has been done. It's restored my faith in the justice system," he said.
Asked if he had any advice for other young Muslim men who were looking at similar material, he said: "I don't think these boys did anything wrong. It was just propaganda they were looking at. They had no links to terrorism - everybody looks at websites."
'Knee-jerk terror laws'
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the government's "knee-jerk drafting of new terrorism offences" had led to confusion on the part of prosecutors.
He said: "Ministers need to be more cautious when drafting new offences and more effective in enforcing old ones."
Muslim Parliament of Great Britain leader Dr Ghayasudin Siddiqui told BBC Radio 5 Live he welcomed the ruling but hoped that the students' experiences would serve as a warning to other young Muslims.
He said: "It must go out to other young people that it is a dangerous area and they have to keep themselves far, far away from visiting these websites."
Online chatroomsOnline chatrooms
During the trial, the jury heard that the four Bradford students were arrested after Mr Raja, then a schoolboy in Ilford, had run away to join them in Yorkshire. During the trial, the jury heard the four Bradford students were arrested after Mr Raja - then an Ilford schoolboy - ran away to join them.
The teenager, who had been unhappy at home, left a note for his parents saying he was going to fight abroad after getting to know the others via online chatrooms used by extremist recruiters. He left a note for his parents saying he was going to fight abroad after getting to know the others via online chatrooms used by extremist recruiters.
But within days, he realised his mistake and returned home. His parents, shocked by the letter, had already alerted the police. Mr Raja co-operated with detectives, leading to the arrest of all five of the group and the collection of the extremist material. He returned home within days but his parents had already alerted the police, who arrested all five and collected the extremist material.
But in their hearing before the Court of Appeal, the men argued that they should not have been convicted solely on the allegation that they had downloaded and shared literature off the internet. In their appeal, the men argued they should not have been convicted solely on the basis that they had downloaded and shared literature from the internet.
The material included publications popular among extreme Islamist organisations, encouraging Muslims to fight. One of the five had also used a computer to superimpose his own face on a montage of the 9/11 hijackers.The material included publications popular among extreme Islamist organisations, encouraging Muslims to fight. One of the five had also used a computer to superimpose his own face on a montage of the 9/11 hijackers.
But lawyers for the men said that the law had been designed to catch people holding plans for bombs rather than propaganda. But their lawyers said the law was designed to catch people holding plans for bombs rather than propaganda.
None of the men possessed information which suggested they were plotting a bomb attack, although there had been talk of heading to Pakistan for paramilitary training. None of the men possessed information suggesting they were plotting a bomb attack, although there had been talk of heading to Pakistan for paramilitary training.
The prosecution, they argued, had relied on a "maverick use" of the law which had never been intended by Parliament, said the appeal lawyers.
Joel Bennathan QC, for Mr Zafar, told the Court of Appeal that his client had been criminalised over literature.
"The evidence at trial was that [Mr Zafar] made no attempt to conceal his very large collection of pro-jihadi sermons and lectures," said Mr Bennathan in his written arguments to the court.
"His computer had no password, nor was any significant material encrypted or deleted."