Starmer meeting Indian PM ‘golden' chance to help detained Briton
Mr Johal, a Sikh activist from Dumbarton near Glasgow, was arrested while in India for his wedding, and has been held ever since – despite having been cleared of one of the cases against him earlier this year.
But he still faces charges at a federal level, which his supporters – who claim an initial confession he made was as a result of torture – fear could take years to come to a conclusion.
However, campaigners at Reprieve, who have been working to free Mr Johal, say the talks between the UK and Indian leaders could be a 'rare chance to make progress' in the case.
The Indian prime minister is visiting London to sign a landmark, free trade agreement between his country and the UK.
And Gurpreet Singh Johal, said: 'I'm putting my faith in the Prime Minister to get this done and bring Jagtar home.'
He said Sir Keir had 'recognised that Jagtar is arbitrarily detained' and that Foreign Secretary David Lammy had twice told him that 'resolving the case is a priority for this Government'.
Leaving for UK, a country with which our Comprehensive Strategic Partnership has achieved significant momentum in the last few years. I look forward to my talks with PM Keir Starmer and my meeting with His Majesty King Charles III. @Keir_Starmer @RoyalFamily…
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) July 23, 2025
Mr Johal said: 'That means it should be high on the agenda when the prime ministers meet.
'Over the last eight years, I've grown very tired of fine words and weak excuses for a lack of action, while my brother grows old in prison.
'The time is now – it would be devastating if the Prime Minister lets this golden opportunity slip away.'
Dan Dolan, deputy executive director of Reprieve, said returning Mr Johal to the UK should be a priority for Sir Keir when he has talks with his Indian counterpart on Thursday.
Mr Dolan said: 'Jagtar has been found not guilty of the allegations against him, and it should be a priority for Keir Starmer to secure his release and return to Britain.
'Trying him again for the same crime, on the same evidence, is prohibited in India's constitution and in international law.
'This is a clear cut case of double jeopardy and it is in everyone's interests to see it resolved.
'This week's talks are a rare chance to make progress at the very highest level.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on talking in class: the writers speaking up for oracy education are right
Two years ago, Sir Keir Starmer enthused about teaching speaking skills. So schools campaigners were understandably dismayed when oracy – otherwise known as speaking and listening – did not appear in the interim report of the curriculum review for England headed by Prof Becky Francis. Peter Hyman, the former New Labour adviser who became a headteacher, has been a key figure behind the revival, over the past decade, of an idea developed in the 1960s. Steps to embed the importance of verbal communication in education have already been taken, with more than 1,000 schools working with the charity Voice 21, and a parallel project in Scotland. The hope expressed by children's authors and others last week is that its absence from the draft report was an oversight which will soon be rectified. The task before Prof Francis's commission is a daunting one, with reformers of all kinds looking to it for solutions. An evidence call attracted 7,000 responses, with the future of special educational needs provision, and a wish to reduce exams, among key issues raised. But it should be clear to the panel, and to ministers, that oral learning also matters. One reason is the rising number of children arriving in primary school with speech and language skills below the expected level. While some pupils catch up later, others need specialist help. Communication difficulties are one reason for the increase in the number of education, health and care plans (EHCPs), which set out what such support entails. The reasons for such complex changes are not yet fully understood, although the pandemic has had an impact. The challenge of artificial intelligence, in relation to university studies as well as schools, is another factor behind a renewed emphasis on talking. Given the easy availability of technological tools to aid writing, it is arguably more important than ever that people are equipped to share ideas and knowledge through speech as well. In many European countries oral examinations are far more common, in schools as well as universities, whereas in the UK 'vivas' are mostly reserved for postgraduate studies. In foreign language learning, the importance of speaking is taken for granted. But while oracy already features in the maths and science curriculum, as well as in English, it is often marginalised. The tricky task of reformers is to alter teaching practice so that more weight is placed on verbal communication, without making this yet another assessment hurdle to be cleared. For its champions, the core of oracy education is the ability to make connections. They want young people to be able to express themselves, and point out that this is a vital life skill – for example, in job interviews and the kinds of public‑facing work that seem least likely to be taken over by machines – for which school should prepare them. Big gaps in confidence about public speaking have long been recognised among the most glaring social inequalities. This doesn't mean that everyone should aspire to be a debating champion. Different accents, personalities and ways of relating should be valued, not ironed out. But if our schools are to keep pace with our frenetically changing world, it is surely right that they should maximise the facility for language, which is part of what makes us human.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Starmer must take a strong line with Trump to relieve the suffering in Gaza
The phrase 'walking a diplomatic tightrope' is overused by the media, but it is an accurate description of Sir Keir Starmer's task when he meets Donald Trump on Monday for talks at the US president's Turnberry golf course in Scotland. According to Downing Street sources, the prime minister will discuss what more can be done to secure a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, to 'bring an end to the unspeakable suffering and starvation in Gaza', and to hasten the release of the remaining Israeli hostages. Sir Keir is under growing pressure from Labour backbenchers, and several members of his cabinet, to go further by joining France's Emmanuel Macron in formally recognising Palestinian statehood. But if the prime minister did so, it would weaken his hand with Mr Trump, the only foreign leader with meaningful influence over Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. So Gaza poses a big test for Sir Keir's quietly effective strategy of not challenging or criticising the US president in public. We have to take it on trust that he will argue strongly behind closed doors for the US to restart the peace talks it led in Qatar before it pulled out, blaming Hamas for the lack of progress. Indeed, President Trump should revive plans for a 60-day ceasefire, the release of some hostages, and – crucially – an increase in aid supplies, which are desperately needed to prevent more deaths from starvation. Such an approach by Sir Keir will not be enough for the 221 MPs, including a third of Labour backbenchers, who have signed a letter calling for the immediate recognition of Palestine. Or, indeed, for much of the British public. It is not surprising, given the harrowing pictures of emaciated children in TV news bulletins, that opinion in the UK is turning against Israel, which rightly enjoyed the goodwill of many after the horrific 7 October attacks. According to More in Common, 29 per cent of people now sympathise more with the Palestinians – up by 11 percentage points since November 2023 – while 27 per cent sympathise with neither side, 16 per cent with both sides equally, and 15 per cent with Israel. Some 48 per cent believe Israel's response to the conflict has been disproportionate, and only 28 per cent think it proportionate. Amid mounting outrage, Israel has announced a limited 'tactical pause' in its military operation in three areas of Gaza to allow in more humanitarian relief. The easing of restrictions is welcome, if long overdue, but it must be more than a cynical temporary move. It is no substitute for a ceasefire leading to negotiations on a long-term peace settlement. Nor will the airdrops planned by the UK and Jordan be more than a sticking plaster; they are ineffective compared with relief delivered by lorries, and sometimes even dangerous. Sir Keir's reluctance to recognise Palestine may prove to have been a holding line. If countries such as Germany, Canada and Australia change their minds and back France, he may shift. The SNP plans to force a vote on the issue when the Commons returns from its summer recess in September, which would expose Labour divisions. That month, the Labour conference will be problematic for its leader if he doesn't change tack, while the UN general assembly will discuss France's move. Yet for now, The Independent believes the prime minister is right to maximise his influence with President Trump, and to keep the recognition of Palestine as a card to play in talks on a permanent peace that must include a two-state solution to the Israel-Hamas conflict. Recognising Palestine now would not in itself change the terrible conditions on the ground in Gaza, as Bob Geldof, the Live Aid organiser, told Sky News on Sunday. He said it should have been done 'ages ago', but that the demands of Labour MPs amount to a distraction that 'is not going to make any material difference'. Sir Keir's quiet diplomacy is a better response to the crisis in Gaza than the tone-deafness of Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader. Interviewed on Sky, she backed calls for a ceasefire but said: 'What I see when I see Israel is a country that's trying to defend itself.' She declared that the pictures of starving children had not affected her support for Israel, insisting that it is allowing in relief supplies – a view that is hotly disputed by the United Nations and aid agencies. So far, Sir Keir has confounded critics who warned that he would not be able to have it both ways and maintain good relations with the US and the EU. He has secured trade deals with both. The emergency in Gaza now poses a big test for the prime minister's strong record on foreign affairs in the past year, which regrettably has not been matched on the domestic front. Sir Keir's understandable desire to hug Mr Trump close should not lead him to pull his punches over the gruesome tragedy unfolding in Gaza.
The Herald Scotland
8 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Mother of Air India crash victim ‘heartbroken' after remains wrongly identified
Some 169 Indian passengers and 52 British nationals were killed, making it one of the deadliest plane crashes in terms of the number of British fatalities. Among the British victims were Fiongal Greenlaw-Meek, 39, and his husband Jamie, 45, who had been returning to Britain after celebrating their wedding anniversary in India. Mr Greenlaw-Meek's mother, Amanda Donaghey, told The Sunday Times she flew to India after the crash in order to find her son's remains, providing a DNA sample at Ahmedabad's Civil Hospital to assist the identification process. Following a match on June 20 last year, she returned to the UK with Mr Greenlaw-Meek's coffin. But on July 5, as Mr Greenlaw-Meek and his husband's families prepared to bury the married couple together, police told Ms Donaghey that DNA tests carried out in the UK showed Mr Greenlaw-Meek's remains were not in the coffin. 'We don't know what poor person is in that casket,' she told The Sunday Times. 'I had my doubts but to be told that was heartbreaking. 'This is an appalling thing to have happened,' she added. 'And we would now like the British Gvernment to do everything in its power to find out, and bring Fiongal home.' It was revealed last week the coffin of another repatriated British victim, 71-year-old Shobhana Patel, contained remains of multiple people, The Sunday Times reported. Mrs Patel was killed alongside her husband Ashok, 74, as they returned to the UK from a Hindu religious trip. Their son Miten Patel told The Sunday Times: 'There may have been a mistake done. 'But for religious reasons we need to make sure my mother is my mother and not somebody else's remains. 'Knowing 100% that it is my mum is very important to us.' Shobhana and Ashok Patel were laid to rest last week, The Sunday Times said. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer (right) with the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi (Kin Cheung/PA) International aviation lawyer James Healey-Pratt, whose firm Keystone Law is representing families of victims of the Air India crash, has told Times Radio the identification issues have raised concerns over the total number of victims whose identities may have been misattributed. 'We know that 12 caskets were repatriated from India to the UK,' he said. 'Of those 12, two had been mishandled, misidentified. 'And so if you extrapolate that sample, you're looking at 40 mishandled remains out of 240. 'So that's a very large number, but we simply don't know. 'And to date, the Indian authorities have not been transparent or helpful about that, which is why there was pressure put on by the families to the FCO and the Prime Minister's office. 'And this was actually mentioned in the meeting at Chequers between Keir Starmer and Prime Minister Modi on Thursday. 'So the families are waiting to hear, first thing next week, about what actions are really being done in India to provide some degree of assurance.' It is understood no blame is being put on any UK agency for the blunders, Mr Healy-Pratt previously told the PA news agency. The only surviving passenger on the plane was Briton Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, who previously told The Sun it was a 'miracle' he was alive but felt 'terrible' he could not save his brother Ajay. A preliminary report into the incident from India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau found both of the plane's fuel switches moved to the 'cut-off' position 'immediately' after take-off, stopping fuel supply to the engine. It has sparked questions over whether the crash was deliberate.
