Hicham Yezza | ukwatch.net

Hicham Released After 31 days In Detention

Ellie Keen — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:16:26 +0000

Press Release

From a group of Nottingham residents, concerned students and academics at the University of Nottingham, UK.

Following the cancellation order on his deportation, and after being detained for over 30 days, Hicham Yezza has been released on bail after the Home Office refused to grant him temporary release.

Hicham, a prominent political journal editor, writer and University member was arrested under anti-terror legislation for the possession of ‘radical material’ on May 14th. The document in question is widely used for research purposes and was downloaded from an official US government website. At the time of the arrest the document was being used as material for a PhD proposal (supervised by staff in the Department of Politics and International Relations) of a student friend who was also arrested.

In the wake of the arrest the Home Office attempted to deport Hicham: a move that elicited widespread condemnation. Alan Simpson MP said: “The basis of that removal is to try to justify the abuse of power under the Terrorism Act” (see website for text of speech). The deportation order was cancelled in the midst of protests and a concerted campaign for Hicham’s release, but he remained in detention for weeks in various immigration removal centres. The Home Office attempted to justify Hicham’s continued detention by claiming he had an ‘absence of close ties’ to the UK. This was despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, including hundreds of character references from friends and university colleagues, testifying to his excellent character and exceptional contributing to British society over the last 13 years.

Hicham’s arrest highlights the routine and inappropriate use of the terror laws in Britain. Despite the fact that the ‘radical material’ was immediately confirmed as research material by academic supervisors, both Hicham and Riswaan Sabir were held for 6 days. This is a pre-charge detention period that would be illegal in most EU countries.

This development comes in the wake of recent national debate surrounding the extension to 42 days pre-charge detention and at a time when the US Supreme Court reaffirms the writ of habeas corpus in relation terror suspects held in Guantanamo. Yet the UK Government continues to undermine this cornerstone of liberty and accelerates the erosion of fundamental civil liberties.

When asked for comment on his release, Hicham said: “Being detained for the past 31 days has been the most harrowing experience of my life. The support my campaign has received from thousands of friends and supporters – including MPs academics, artists and concerned citizens in Nottingham and beyond – has been nothing short of inspirational and has sustained me through this difficult time. I have spent almost half my life in Nottingham and throughout that time have done my utmost to be a productive and positive member of the student and local communities. I look forward to continuing my fight for justice and I hope sense will prevail.”

Campaign coordinator Musab Younis expressed his delight, commenting: “The incredible success of the campaign is testament to Hicham’s deep roots in the community and unique contribution as a well-known activist, academic, writer, and artist. The campaign will press ahead in its aim to secure Hicham’s right to stay in the UK. We confidently expect a swift and positive resolution to this case, in line with the values of justice and free speech that we expect our country to uphold.”

“We are delighted that Hicham Yezza has been granted immigration bail and has been released,” said David Smith, immigration specialist with Midlands law firm Cartwright King and who is representing Mr Yezza. “The judicial review will now continue and we hope that the case will proceed in an orderly fashion to its proper conclusion.”

Contact the Campaign:
Phone: 07948590262 / 07505863957 / 07726466211
Email: staffandstudents@googlemail.com
Website: http://freehichamyezza.wordpress.com

Rushing to Nottingham's Defence

Ellie Keen — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0000

Two academics from the University Nottingham have condemned the campaign in support of Hicham Yezza, an employee of Nottingham University charged over terrorism offences and released only to be re-arrested over spurious immigration offences. The two, Dr Sean Matthews and Dr Macdonald Daly, while expressing concern for the situation currently facing Mr Yezza who is being indefinitely held in immigration detention, condemn what they call the “irresponsible, opportunistic and unethical conduct of many colleagues involved in the campaign to support Mr Yezza.”

The authors of the statement start by making two substantive points. Firstly, that “we are confident that the University’s declarations about upholding academic freedom have been reflected in its response to the arrests.” Secondly, they claim that “we do not believe that the arrests constitute a challenge or threat to academic freedom.”

The argument therefore turns around whether the arrest of Hicham Yezza and Rizwaan Sabir, originally for downloading and printing an Al Qaeda training manual, was in contravention of academic freedom. Matthews and Daly contend that academic freedom has not been violated and that the University, in immediately reporting the matter to the police, was merely fulfilling its legal duty.

They also place the blame at Yezza and Sabir’s door by claiming that they acted irresponsibly by colluding to print out the document (Mr. Sabir, a student asked his friend, Yezza, a staff member to print the document out for him for free). Had they not done so, the matter would never have come to the notice of the authorities. In making this claim, the authors are noting that banal occurrences of this nature happen on a regular basis. What they fail to do is make the connection between Sabir and Yezza’s actions and the heavy-handedness of the response. As was noted in the letter signed by staff and students at Sussex and Brighton Universities, it is clear that if the two “culprits” were not of Middle-Eastern/North African origin, their actions would have gone unnoticed, given that the document they printed out is widely available on various official websites, including that of the US government. Simply, a two-tiered rule is being applied: one for those safe in the knowledge that their white privilege will shield them from the law, even if – as happens on a regular basis – they contravene “the rules” by getting a friend to do their printing for them; another for those on the “most wanted” list that connects them by skin colour, religion and/or national origin to those purported to be “out to get us”.

What is even more worrying about this case is the connection to immigration. Hicham Yezza is now being held in detention pending potential deportation from the UK for violation of his immigration status. This appears spurious given that he was working for the University, which must have been aware of his legal status, and about to apply for British citizenship based on his 13 years of residence in the UK. Despite this, the authors of the statement claim:

Had Mr Yezza been able to substantiate his claim to the University that he had the appropriate legal employment status, as all employees are required to do when they take up a post, or even had he been able later when the University asked him, as it is legally required to do, to provide documentation to substantiate such a claim, he would not have been arrested for immigration irregularities. Again, the responsibility for his arrest appears to relate to his own failure to provide appropriate documentation.

By putting the case in such procedural terms, Matthews and Daly are missing two points: Firstly, procedurally, no University in the UK employs anyone before their immigration status has been officially verified. Therefore, the immigration offences he is deemed to have committed appear mainly to be bogus. Secondly and more importantly, the authors fail to admit that current policy on “terrorism” works also to demonise “immigrants” as potential terrorists. Thus, by very virtue of one’s status as a non-citizen from outside the EU, the US, Australia, etc. one is potentially guilty of plotting against the British state. Countless people, many long-term residents of the UK, have fallen victim of this politics that condemns people, especially those of “Arab” or “Muslim” origin, to de facto suspicion. As is documented in the film Taking Liberties, this has led to individuals being condemned to indefinite house arrest or imprisonment in criminal and/or immigration detention centres despite no hard evidence being brought against them relating to their purported links to terrorism.

This leads back to the issue of academic freedom. Part of what the current attack on universities from government and big business is doing is to silence individual academics who have chosen this career precisely because traditionally it enabled us to speak openly and freely about issues that concern us. It is ironic that, on the one hand, the talk is of liberalisation and flexibility, and on the other, we are being asked to police our students, suspected of involvement with “radical islamists”. In the logic of the market, academics are styling their research funding applications to suit what they think will be funded rather than what they wish to research; what they believe will benefit society.

Ironicially, one of the biggest research areas identified by the research councils in tandem with government policy, is that of “security studies”. This is exactly what Rizwaan Sabir was engaged in, downloading a document that is considered by security specialists crucial to the understanding of why “they hate us” and how terror networks such as Al Qaeda function. The question left begging, thefore, is just what kind of research is admissible and who should be allowed to carry it out? In absence of a clear response, we are all left asking the question, who will be next to be picked off, and how soon before it is not someone who can be attacked through the vehicle of immigration offences as was the case in Germany last year. And what, in the present climate, will no longer be deemed admissible research? If these are not questions of academic freedom, surely little else is…

Academic Freedom

Ellie Keen — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:21:59 +0000

AS NOTTINGHAM POST-GRAD FACES DEPORTATION AFTER FAILED TERROR ARREST

The story of the two Nottingham Uni students who were arrested on bogus terror charges two weeks ago has turned into a victimisation campaign against one of the arrestees. Hicham Yezza, one of two men arrested for downloading information about Al Qaeda from a US government website, is currently languishing in the Dover Immigration Removal Centre, where he is being threatened with deportation to Algeria. Originally he was booked on a BA flight on Sunday the 31st, before he had a chance to launch an appeal or work on a defence for himself. It was only when the students and staff at Notts Uni launched a full scale campaign for his release that the deportation order was delayed (one day before his deportation date).

Once Hich’s six day stint of interrogation under Terrorism laws was over, he was promptly re-arrested by immigration officials, accusing him of living and working illegally in the UK. Despite the fact that he’s been here, living, working & studying here for 13 years. And he hasn’t really kept a low profile, much of this time working as a magazine editor and popular on-campus activist.

A large part of Hich’s initial interrogation at the hands of anti-terror cops concerned his involvement with the Nottingham students’ peace magazine ‘Ceasefire.’ Cops are notoriously devoid of irony, otherwise it might have occurred to them to question the rationale behind busting peaceniks for terrorism. Police questioned Hich and his co-arrestee Riswan in detail about the funding for the mag (no doubt straight from Bin Laden’s Jihadi billions).

The cops have excelled at dubious and underhand methods. Confiscating 20 computers from the uni, they told the press that they extended the pair’s detentions because they had ‘further potential evidence.’ With the implication that there was something on the pair, what this meant in reality was that they hadn’t got the staff to search through all the computers.

It was the university staff that dobbed Hich in. Being the kind of guy who would go out of his way to help a mate, he offered to print out the (US government approved) Al Qaeda training manual because his friend Riswan hadn’t got enough credit on his university printing card.

Having initially stitched them up, Notts Uni have bent over backwards to help the police and repress freedom of speech on campus. A statement from the uni said that the AQ manual is ‘contentious,’ and ‘sensitive,’ and that only approved academics and students should have access to it. The idea that information that is legally and freely available should be restricted on campus seems to fly in the face of the traditional role of universities as places that encourage academic freedoms. (Fortunately, given the shitstorm that this case has produced, that doesn’t seem likely).

The Free Hich campaign isn’t planning on going away once they’ve have secured their man’s release. They’re already widening its scope to to become a broad-based civil liberties and anti-deportation campaign. Even as they campaign for Hich another Nottingham campaigner has been targeted by immigration authorities. Amdani Juma, a Burundian HIV-AIDS campaigner who has been involved in the free Hich campaign was picked up two days after he made an appearance at the free Hich demo on the 28th of May.

Hich’s case has turned into a ‘perfect storm’ of the state’s use of anti-terror and immigration laws used to repress a dedicated peace activist and critical writer. Many inside the campaign claim that Hich’s detention under immigration law is a last gasp attempt to claw back something after the terror arrests turned out to be nothing of the sort. However, whilst shying away from any suggestion of shapeshifting paedophile lizards (out of fear probably) us at SchNEWS sense the hand of conspiracy against an effective and popular critic of the Neo-Con/Neo-Labour ruling ideology.

www.freehichamyezza.wordpress.com

Nottingham ‘terror arrests’

Ellie Keen — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:45:30 +0000

‘The clampdown is about trying to depoliticise us’

The harrowing story of Rizwaan Sabir – a postgraduate student studying terrorism who was arrested for downloading an Al Qaida training manual – is testimony to the Islamaphobia that has been whipped up by politicians and the media.

Rizwaan, a student at Nottingham university, was held for almost a week without charge. He says his case shows where the steady erosion of academic freedom and civil liberties can lead.

It also shows why the government’s plans to further extend anti-terror legislation are dangerous and wrong-headed.

Rizwaan spoke to Socialist Worker about what happened and his fears for the future.

“At first when I was arrested I thought it was a joke,” he said. “I was taken to a cell and kept there all day. I kept asking why I’d been arrested but nobody would tell me.

“Later in the afternoon I was told that my house would be searched. I was photographed, fingerprinted, footprinted and a DNA swab was taken.”

The police held Rizwaan in their cells for six days and repeatedly questioned him.

“My family were trying to find out what had happened but the police wouldn’t tell them anything. The police just kept asking me the same questions. They asked me if I’d been to Pakistan, if I’d been to the North West Frontier Province bordering Afghanistan, if I’d been to Iraq. They asked me if I was planning on going camping.”

Rizwaan says he thinks that the police knew he was a genuine researcher after his first interview and that they knew they had no reason to hold him.

“They said that they had to go through all the papers they had seized – this becomes a reason for detaining people for ever longer periods of time,” he said.

“When I was released I was given a statement saying that the university had confirmed that the manual wasn’t relevant to my course. I don’t know where that came from.”

Some 500 students and university staff held a protest in support of Rizwaan and his friend and university employee Hicham Yezza, who had helped Rizwaan by printing the manual.

“People read bits of the manual out in front of the media to show solidarity,” said Rizwaan. “They can do that but if I read the manual again I could be investigated further.

Connection

“I think that the clampdown is about trying to depoliticise people, but treating people like this can further radicalise them.”

Maria Ryan is a lecturer at the university who was interviewed by the police in connection with Rizwaan. She told Socialist Worker, “The police told me Rizwaan had been arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Initially I just laughed. I told them he had downloaded the manual because he was researching radical Islam.

“I explained that the manual is in the public domain. They responded that if it gets into the ‘wrong hands’ there could be problems.

“They asked me various questions about Rizwaan – what he thinks of the US and US foreign policy and what he thinks of Israel and suicide bombing.

“They also asked me some personal questions about him. How many friends does he have? Does he pray? Does he drink alcohol? Does he go to pubs?

“I had another visit from a police officer a few days later. It was clear that they had realised he was a genuine researcher.

“But there is a problem – what do you do if the law prohibits possession of certain material?

“It’s worrying that the police have such wide-ranging powers to arrest people without charge. They arrest first and investigate after. And when they realise they’ve made a mistake they don’t know what to do.”

After being released without charge, Hicham was threatened with deportation to Algeria until a last-minute reprieve last week. He now faces a judicial review.