‘A US trial of two members of Islamic State accused of taking part in the beheading of hostages appears likely to go ahead, following a legal ruling that allows the UK to share evidence with US prosecutors.’
The Guardian, 26th August 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 10, a seven-Justice Supreme Court held that the provision of material by way of mutual legal assistance to the US for the prosecution of Shafee El Sheikh and Alexanda Kotey, without obtaining an assurance that the evidence would not be used in a death penalty trial, was unlawful. The consequences of this judgment, both generally and specifically for Mr El Sheikh and Mr Kotey, are unknown. Where does it leave the provision to the US of further material in relation to these two individuals? In what circumstances could the UK government truly claim to be satisfied that the transfer would be lawful? Only a careful reading of this judgment can assist, and even then such assistance may be limited.’
6KBW College Hill, 1st June 2020
Source: blog.6kbw.com
‘This post discusses the impact of the new CLOUD Act international data sharing regime on the UK’s death penalty assurances policy. This regime—named after its enabling US legislation, the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act—is due to come into force in July 2020 following the signing of a bilateral US–UK agreement in October 2019 (US-UK Agreement). It provides a quicker alternative for law enforcement seeking access to electronic data overseas, beyond the existing mutual legal assistance (MLA) process, which operates through MLA treaties (MLATs) and other mechanisms. However, while the CLOUD Act regime has an admirable aim, its implementation weakens the UK’s existing death penalty assurances policy and thus risks exposing the UK and others to significant liability, as discussed below.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 1st June 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The long anticipated judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department was handed down by the Supreme Court on the 25th March. The Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) that rendered the decision of the then Home Secretary- Sajid Javid- to hand over evidence to US authorities unlawful. While others have commented on the DPA aspect of this case (see here, here, and here), this post touches on the common law strand. However, rather than interrogating the Court’s decision, here I discuss the under-examined issue of rationality, arguing that the factual matrix of the case warranted a greater examination of the Home Secretary’s decision.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 6th May 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Many will no doubt pore over the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department to evaluate its significance for the common law constraint of prerogative power. Ultimately, however, the Supreme Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 that rendered the decision in question unlawful. This post considers the significance of the Data Protection Act 2018 for protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects. Although the narrow ground upon which the judgment was decided will offer some procedural protections for fundamental rights and freedoms, the case’s significance lies in its suggestion as to how data protection law might offer some scope for extending the extraterritorial application of human rights beyond the limits of the European Convention on Human Rights.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th April 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Since signing the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention in 1999, the UK has refused to extradite or deport persons to countries where they are facing criminal charges that carry the death penalty.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 14th April 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On 25 March 2020, the UK Supreme Court issued R (El Gizouli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 10. Due to the COVID-19 global pandemic, this was the court’s first judgment to be handed down remotely. It confirmed the importance of data protection laws to international transfers of personal information for law enforcement purposes and may have even broader ramifications.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 13th April 2020
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘Case note on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Elgizouli (appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (respondent) [2020] UKSC 10.’
The 36 Group, 30th March 2020
Source: 36group.co.uk
‘The UK Supreme Court today ruled that the British Government acted unlawfully in a case where it departed from the UK’s longstanding policy on opposing the death penalty in all circumstances.’
Garden Court Chambers, 25th March 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Foreign fighters. Law enforcement cooperation with the US. The death penalty. A seven judge bench in the Supreme Court. Despite showing all the signs of a landmark public law decision, Elgizouli v Secretary of the State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 10 was a bit of a fizzer on that front. In the end, the real meat was in the DPA 2018’s regulation of law enforcement processing and international data transfers.’
Panopticon, 30th March 2020
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘The appellant’s son is alleged to have been one of a group of terrorists operating in Syria, involved in the murder of US and British citizens. The US made a mutual legal assistance request to the UK in relation to an investigation into the activities of that group. The Home Secretary requested an assurance that the information would not be used directly or indirectly in a prosecution that could lead to the imposition of the death penalty. The US refused to provide a full death penalty assurance and the Home Secretary agreed to provide information to the US without requiring any assurance. The appellant challenged the Home Secretary’s decision by way of judicial review. The questions for the Supreme Court were firstly whether it is unlawful for the Secretary of State to exercise his power to provide MLA so as to supply evidence to a foreign state that will facilitate the imposition of the death penalty in that state on the individual and secondly whether it is lawful under the Data Protection Act 2018, Part 3 for law enforcement authorities in the UK to transfer personal data to law enforcement authorities abroad for use in capital criminal proceedings.’
UKSC Blog, 25th March 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘The UK acted unlawfully by passing evidence to the US that could lead to the execution of two British members of an Islamic State murder squad.’
BBC News, 25th March 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The British government’s decision to co-operate with US authorities over the prosecution of two alleged Islamic State executioners without assurances that they will not face the death penalty, is to be challenged in the high court on Monday.’
The Guardian, 8th October 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Lawyer and human rights champion Sir Louis Blom-Cooper passed away in London, aged 92, on September 19, 2018. Here are some of the ways in which Blom-Cooper blazed a trail for human rights.’
Rights Info, 2nd October 2018
Source: rightsinfo.org
‘European human rights judges would rule Britain’s plan to waive death penalty assurances for two suspected members of the Isil ‘Beatles’ terror cell illegal, experts say, and could order the UK to seek US guarantees and even pay the men damages.’
Daily Telegraph, 28th July 2018
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘UK ministers could face a legal challenge to the decision to assist the US extradition of two former British Islamic State terrorists without demanding they do not face the death penalty, as Downing Street backed Sajid Javid’s decision to allow the move.’
The Guardian, 24th July 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Sajid Javid has dropped Britain’s blanket opposition to the death penalty in order to allow two notorious British Isls fighters to be sent to the United States.’
The Independent, 23rd July 2018
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘On the night of Friday 15 November 1957, 24-year-old Vivian Teed broke into the sub-post office in Fforestfach, Swansea.’
BBC News, 6th May 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Five British judges will this week consider whether a prisoner who may be mentally ill should remain on death row after a Caribbean court convicted him of murdering another inmate.’
The Guardian, 15th January 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘He was one of the last two men hanged in Britain. A habitual liar convicted of murdering a man who had been his friend, and perhaps his lover. But according to a leading criminal lawyer, who has viewed documents uncovered by the BBC, he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.’
BBC News, 18th December 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2022