MPs call for 'quick' action to free Jagtar Singh Johal
Mr Johal's family and legal team had hoped India's Supreme Court would issue a ruling on Thursday on whether he would be granted bail but they say there was no decision and no timeframe for the matter to be resolved.Mr Johal is accused of being a member of a terror group, the Khalistan Liberation Force (KLF), which has carried out attacks in the Punjab region.
The charges against him stated that he travelled to Paris in 2013 and delivered £3,000 to other KLF figures, with the money then used to purchase weapons which were used in a series of murders and attacks against Hindu nationalist and other religious leaders across 2016 and 2017.Mr Johal claims he was tortured in the early days of his detention and forced to make a confession.The letter to Foreign Secretary David Lammy has been signed by cross-party MPs and peers.It says there is a "window of opportunity" to secure Jagtar's release following his acquittal in one of the cases against him.The letter says: "The judgement on the evidence led is crucial and relevant to securing his release, because it is the same evidence that exists in the other outstanding federal court cases."The 38-year-old's family says the Lammy has agreed to meet them on 8 May.They have repeatedly called for the UK government to do more to secure his release through diplomatic channels with the Indian government.
'Wasted years'
Mr Johal's brother Gurpreet Singh Johal, who is also a Labour councillor, said: "I'm glad the foreign secretary is meeting me again, as it shows he recognises that this is a make-or-break moment for Jagtar. "The case against my brother has been tested in court and rejected, but the Indian authorities will keep him in prison for decades if the UK government doesn't act to secure his release. "We've seen that today at the Supreme Court – just the latest in an endless series of delays. This is the moment of truth for David Lammy: will he live up to his promises, or will he fail Jagtar like the last six foreign secretaries did?"Dan Dolan, deputy executive director of the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Reprieve, said it was time for the government to act.He said: "The previous UK government wasted years of Jagtar Singh Johal's life, hiding behind the fiction that due process is possible in a case based on a torture confession. "This is a politically motivated prosecution of a young British human rights defender, and the process is the punishment."The letter to Lammy was issued by the Labour MP for Jagtar's constituency, Douglas McAllister, who said the cross-party support was very significant. He said: "The failure to grant bail to my constituent, Jagtar Singh Johal, serves to demonstrate the need for greater urgency by the foreign secretary and the UK government to secure my constituent's immediate release and his return to his family in West Dunbartonshire. "I will be advising the foreign secretary when we meet next week of the strength of feeling across both houses that now is the time to act."The Indian government has repeatedly denied that Mr Johal was mistreated and has said due process has been followed in the case against him.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
26 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
White House branded 'disgusting' for using Jet2 holiday sound in ICE video
A mocking video shows shackled migrants taken by ICE officials onto a deportation plane in the United States while a Jet2 holiday advert is used as a voiceover A Jet2 voiceover for a holiday advert has been used by the White House to mock migrants being deported from the United States. Footage was shown of handcuffed people being taken by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials onto a GlobalX flight - an airline provider used by the American authorities. And along with a familiar jig for British viewers of a Jet2 advert, the post is captioned: 'When ICE books you a one-way Jet2 holiday to deportation. Nothing beats it!' It was immediately blasted as 'disgusting' by social media users and is just the latest provocative social media post by the Trump administration. The video showed migrants in shackles making their way onto deportation flights and while the faces of the ICE agents were blurred out, those of the immigrants, many of whom looked dejectedly at the ground, were clear. The cameraperson even worked to get their faces in the shots. It comes after Donald Trump was seen with a mystery mark in Scotland after his chronic health diagnosis. READ MORE Donald Trump was seen with a mystery mark in Scotland after his chronic health diagnosis "Our country is an embarrassment posting s*** like this," one social media user wrote. "There is no bigger a****** on this site than this account," another added. 'Further proof that the world ended and we're just living in a simulation. The ACTUAL White House account hopping on the Jet2 trend to poke fun at deportees is mind blowing,' read a further comment. And another followed: 'The White House make me sick using the Jet2 sound for an ICE deportation video. How can any decent human being support this?' One person simply wrote, "Disgusting," while another agreed: "You'd have to be a complete moron to find this acceptable on an official WH account. Just another reason why MAGA isn't credible." Another appeared to support President Donald Trump's efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, but they slammed the way he promoted his policies. "This is shameful," that user wrote. "Enforce the law, don't flaunt misery in our faces like it is some accomplishment. Have some respect and human decency ffs." Trump recently signed into law his flagship "big, beautiful bill," which includes a provision that sets aside $170 billion for border and immigration enforcement - including $45 billion (£33.9 billion) for detention. The number of illegal border crossings into the US has plunged, however. ICE is expected to see its budget grow by $76.5 billion (£57.6 billion) over the next five years, which is nearly 10 times its current annual budget. Trump vowed to deport millions of immigrants living in the US illegally, but his efforts have been slower than he seems to want. The Jet2 holiday advert is from 2022 and it features Jess Glynne's 2015 single, Hold My Hand, as well as a voice-over by actress Zoe Lister. "Nothing beats a Jet2 holiday!" she cheerily says in the clip before going on to detail the benefits of the particular package the clip is advertising. And Jess Glynne herself was quick to blast the latest use of her song on Instagram: 'This post honestly makes me sick. My music is about love, unity, and spreading positivity - never about division or hate." While Zoe Lister asked her followers on her story, 'What can be done about the White House using Jet2's sound and my voiceover to promote their nasty agenda?'
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Israel should make its own statehood claims
Britain intends to follow France, and now Canada, in recognising a Palestinian state in September. I've already set out the practical and theoretical problems inherent in such a policy, not least the absence of a functioning Palestinian state to recognise. But we shouldn't lose sight of another effect of this policy: in recognising a state which claims territory also claimed by Israel, Britain, France and Canada harm Israel's sovereign interests in territories where Jewish self-government can be traced back three millennia. This is one of the most inflammatory acts possible in statecraft, one which Whitehall has noticeably refrained from in other conflicts. Israel's angry reaction to Keir Starmer's announcement reflects the grievousness of this diplomatic punch in the face as well as the justified impression that Britain is rewarding the Palestinian leadership responsible for October 7. As I put it when David Cameron proposed recognition in the final months of Rishi Sunak's government, the message sent would be: 'Start a pogrom, get a state.' This is an obscene way to treat Israel, a friendly nation, but it also offends against the UK's national security interests. If terrorism has brought the Palestinians their biggest strategic victory in years — and it very much has — there is a lesson in that for terrorists in other theatres. Anyone who thinks there aren't homegrown jihadists in Britain now considering the logistics of domestic hostage-taking is dangerously naive. If Hamas got a state from Starmer, what could they get? There is anger in Jerusalem, and there should be, but anger is an empty force, futile unless it is channelled into something of substance. The British governing class is behaving as though it's the 1930s and Palestine is still being run by a good chap from the Foreign Office who reckons he could keep the peace with the Arabs if only those blasted Jews stopped causing trouble. It is in Israel's national interest, and its duty to the principle of hadar (dignity), to make it emphatically clear to Whitehall that it no longer calls the shots between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. The Israelis should tell Downing Street in no uncertain terms: this is our land. One of the strategic blunders that got Israel where it is today is the decision to make its case solely in security terms. Among earlier generations of Western leaders this was a winning argument but it has become an albatross for Israel in a new world order in which claims of victimhood and who is indigenous trump all other considerations. The Palestinian argument is that the land belongs to them. Instead of challenging that, the Israelis have for too long responded with a hand-wringing plea for security. This is the language of a burglar caught by the homeowner and begging for mercy. If you don't want to be insecure, don't steal other people's land. Which is why the core of Israel's case should be its legal claims to what is today called 'the West Bank' but was, prior to the mid-20th century, known as Judea and Samaria, the historical, cultural, linguistic and biblical cradle of Jewish civilisation. Security and other considerations should be secondary to the assertion of Israel's national rights in its historic homeland. The background to all this is too protracted to go into here but anyone interested in Israel's legal rights to the 'occupied' territories should consult the writing of international law professors Avi Bell, Eugene Kontorovich, and David M Phillips. So how does Israel make its case? By making new facts on the ground. The British are not the only ones who can act unilaterally. They have decided, with the encouragement of the Europeans and the Palestinians, to tell Israel where its rightful borders lie. It is within Israel's power and compelled by its interests to show Britain otherwise. Benjamin Netanyahu should table a Bill in the Knesset applying the law, jurisdiction and administration of the State of Israel to the settlement blocs and the Jordan Valley. The settlement blocs are Modiin Illit, Beitar Illit, Ariel, Maale Adumim, Gush Etzion and Givat Ze'ev, the six conurbations which are home to roughly 70 per cent of Israelis living in the West Bank. The Jordan Valley (Bik'at HaYarden) is a natural barrier between Israel and the Kingdom of Jordan and Jerusalem's sovereignty over the Israeli side of the valley is essential. Not only because it was part of the Palestine Mandate but — and here is where security comes in — it is also vital to regional stability. Given its strategically valuable topography, a terrorist entity which seized control of Bik'at HaYarden would pose a grave threat to both Israel and Jordan. To keep the Trump administration on board, or at least minimise the blowback, Israel should remain faithful to the president's own 'Deal of the Century' blueprint from 2020. That proposal, more substantive than it was given credit for, would have handed the Palestinians a viable state via land swaps. Naturally, the Palestinians did not engage with it beyond a few pro forma statements. Netanyahu should adopt the Trump plan's precept that, except where it is unavoidable, neither Arabs nor Jews should be evicted from their homes. To that end, any Arabs living in the areas Israel incorporates should be automatically granted Israeli citizenship, with the decision of whether to retain it left up to them. Applying its jurisdiction to these areas would reflect Israel's legal claims to the territory, enhance security on the ground, hinder Palestinian factions' ambitions to take over the West Bank, and send an unmistakable message to countries like Britain: you may not believe in enforcing your borders, but we believe in enforcing ours. The move would make a Palestinian state more difficult to achieve, though no more so than the past 25 years of Palestinian decisions. It would not, however, render such an entity impossible. The vast majority of the West Bank would remain untouched, continuing to be home to self-governing Palestinian areas, large swathes of vacant territory, and outlying Israeli settlements, which would stay under the military jurisdiction of the IDF. Israel does not, and should not, want to rule over millions of hostile foreigners, which is why it should only apply its jurisdiction where it is also prepared to grant citizenship. Jerusalem should maintain security control over the remainder of the West Bank and should focus future settlement building close to the current blocs. Should the Palestinians decide, at some point in the future, to come to the negotiating table and agree to a state of their own, Israel will enter those talks in a stronger position than today. Any suggestion of a retreat to the 1949 armistice lines will be out of the question, and negotiations would instead be about security buffer zones, Palestinian territorial contiguity, and the fate of the remaining settlements, as well as arrangements for access to holy sites. If the Palestinians go on rejecting bilateral talks and a negotiated settlement, that is their choice. It's a national tragedy but it's a self-inflicted one. Israel should remain open to the possibility of a state or state-like entity for the Palestinians but it can't force one on them. To the British political establishment, desperately trying to prop up the crumbling state ideologies of mass immigration, non-integration and multiculturalism, Israel is an ideal punching bag. Thump the Jews enough and perhaps the more unruly additions to your citizenry will simmer down and allow you to govern a little longer. Israel should refuse to be used as a prop by a precarious governing class prepared to trash its foreign relations to manage its domestic dilemmas. Keir Starmer has attacked Israel's sovereign rights. Israel should assert them in response.
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
There never was a right for a man to enter a woman's changing room
Of course, Equality Network was itself free to intervene but chose not to. Mr Hopkins is in a better position to explain this failure but I'd suggest its unwillingness to accept that self-declaration of sex was firmly off the table at the outset hampered any legal argument its members were prepared to accept. Finally, there was no human rights breach. Had there been so, the Supreme Court would have been obliged to issue a declaration of incompatibility. It was never a 'right' for any man to enter women's changing rooms or other spaces and the absurdity of such an argument was laid bare in the court's painstakingly detailed judgment. Anyone now asking the UK Government to amend the Equality Act has the hopefully-impossible task of explaining exactly why basic human rights for women should be removed. In the meantime, women such as Sandie Peggie and Fiona McDonald ("Activist sues own union over gender beliefs",The Herald, July 26) will bravely keep holding employers and unions to account, despite unwarranted and ridiculous 'anti-trans' slurs. All power to their elbow. Trina Budge, Director, For Women Scotland, Edinburgh. Read more letters Blame the activists Tim Hopkins took over a third of a page on Tuesday to spout utter drivel. He talks utter nonsense about the Supreme Court judges not being properly informed, ignoring the wishes of Parliament (and, God forbid, Hansard), about them knowing better what the wording of various pieces of legislation mean, about ignoring other pieces of legislative interpretation, and, almost unbelievably, stating that their judgment contained a "staggeringly naive claim". I suppose we should all be glad that we have the likes of Mr Hopkins, who is clearly a much better-read and learned man than any of our highly skilled judges, to interpret the law. As far as I am aware the trans population in this country is tiny. They should of course have the same and equal rights as the rest of us, that is not in question. They do however appear to be disproportionately represented by a large number of very loud activists. I'm sure Mr Hopkins will know many of them from his past life. Without them the trans community would probably not be in this predicament. Finally, he wants Parliament to "urgently amend the Equality Act... to allow trans people to continue to live their lives in peace and privacy". Where will that leave women, Mr Hopkins? Gregor McKenzie, East Kilbride. Privacy is theirs to own Tim Hopkins pleads for "Parliament to allow trans people to continue to live their lives in peace and (where they wish) privacy". There is nothing and never was anything to stop them doing just that. An issue has been raised that never needed to see the light of day. All it has done is create division and dissension. That was all it was intended to do and the trans community were the chosen vehicle. Politicians, in attempts to unravel the Gordian knot that is humanity, find themselves entangled within it. The learned gentlemen of the bench attempted to offer clarity on what was established in law and on the statute books. In contrast to incoherent interpretations delivered by the political class, the Supreme Court judgment was concise, almost simplistic. However, the Gender Recognition Act of 2004 grants provision to the transgender community and the Equality Act of 2010 protection, thus logic supports a claim that it "would not be disadvantageous to trans people". Mr Hopkins claims: "It is fundamentally changing the situation for trans people across Britain, potentially affecting their access to services from healthcare to toilets." "Potentially" is not reality and the reality is that nothing has changed. Transgender people are perfectly free to live in peace and privacy is theirs to own. Maureen McGarry-O'Hanlon, Jamestown. Ignore this deflection Sandie Peggie, a veteran nurse who was suspended by NHS Fife for objecting to a young, male-born, trans-identifying doctor being in a female changing room while she was undressing, has enjoyed a groundswell of public support. However, NHS Fife's defence lawyer, Jane Russell KC, came up with two witnesses, both former colleagues and friends, who portrayed Ms Peggie in a supposedly new light ("Nurse Peggie recalled after claim she called trans doctor a 'weirdo'", The Herald, July 29). Their evidence mainly consisted of personal characterisations of Ms Peggie based on some politically incorrect banter at some point in the past. Ms Peggie actually didn't deny this and admits that it was in bad taste. Arguably Ms Russell's detailed questions about Sandie Peggie's menstrual flow and who is paying for her case weren't exactly tasteful either. Yet nothing of this should deflect from the matter at hand. What Employment Judge Sandy Kemp will have to decide is not whether Ms Peggie deserved to be suspended due to a supposedly flawed character. He will decide whether NHS Fife acted fairly and lawfully when suspending a nurse for insisting on her sex-based rights, no more, no less. His conclusion will ultimately guide public perception of the case. Regina Erich, Stonehaven. Nurse Sandie Peggie arriving at the employment tribunal in Dundee (Image: PA) End No 10 veto over Scotland I feel that we Scots are now like mushrooms over the constitution: kept in the dark and fed manure, by both politicians and the media. The concept of governance by consent seems to have been discarded by a simplistic numbers game. Labour claims an overwhelming 'mandate' on a third of the votes, while the SNP asserts only an elected majority of them can deliver on independence. Unionist governments lose support in Scotland when they are perceived to have failed and the [[SNP]] suffers the entropy of longevity in office when more things go wrong or are reported as such by an overwhelmingly unionist media. Ireland has the legal right to hold a border poll, when a polling majority is considered in favour of a united Ireland. This should also be the situation in Scotland, and when polling suggests a stable majority in favour of independence, it should happen. An impartial constitutional commission should be set up, by the UK and Scottish governments, to advise whoever is Secretary of State for Scotland on the constitutional etiquette. The days when incumbents of No 10 (especially one who boasts of being leader of the self-proclaimed 'England's Patriotic Party'), hold a veto over Scotland should be consigned to the bin of history. GR Weir, Ochiltree. Let's unite to oust the SNP First Minister Swinney has decided that he has an updated strategy for achieving Scottish independence. More fool him. He may have forgotten that the UK Supreme Court's ruling was quite clear in that there can only be another referendum on such a matter if the UK Government agrees. If the efforts of Alex Salmond and his prodigy Nicola Sturgeon failed to convince the people of Scotland that independence would be to their advantage, then obviously John Swinney is on a hiding to nothing. The Holyrood elections in May 2026 will hopefully see off the [[SNP]] for a very long period. Let us hope that after whatever alliance of political parties is needed to achieve this objective that we will see radical changes put into effect at [[Holyrood]], and also at local council levels. Fellow Scots, let us all be fully supportive of whatever alliance of political parties is needed to oust the SNP. Unless radical changes are put into effect at Holyrood, then the only answer to Scotland's dilemma is to return all political powers to Westminster. Hopefully that will not be the only option. Robert I G Scott, Ceres, Fife.
