Plane bomb plot suspects to face their third trial
By Christopher Leake | September 13, 2009
Three men who allegedly plotted to blow up transatlantic airliners are facing a third trial after the intervention of Britain’s most senior prosecutor.
Two juries have failed to reach verdicts on the men. They were charged with conspiracy to murder in connection with a plan to blow up at least seven planes, each carrying more than 200 passengers between London’s Heathrow airport and the United States and Canada in August 2006.
The plot caused chaos to international aviation and prompted the current restrictions on taking liquids on board aircraft.
Now, in an unusual move, the Director of Public Prosecutions has recommended Waheed Zaman, 25, and Ibrahim Savant and Arafat Waheed Khan, both 28, be tried for a third time.
Three Islamic extremists – Abdulla Ahmed Ali and Tanvir Hussain, both 28, and Assad Sarwar, 29, were found guilty at Woolwich Crown Court last week of conspiring to activate bombs hidden in soft drinks bottles.
The suspected Al Qaeda plot – hatched in Pakistan – was just days from being put into operation, according to British detectives.
Now, the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer believes there is a ‘realistic prospect’ of making a successful case against Savant, Khan and Zaman.
Mr Starmer said that he had ‘considered very carefully’ whether to seek a retrial, adding that the common practice of not prosecuting a defendant for a third time is ‘no more than a convention’ and it was up to him to decide how the public interest would best be served.
He continued: ‘Having taken into account the views of the prosecution team, I am satisfied that, notwithstanding the failure of two juries to agree a verdict, there remains a realistic prospect of a conviction against each defendant on the charge of conspiracy to murder.
‘That being the case, I have considered the public interest factors for and against a further retrial.
‘Having regard to the very serious nature of the charge and the very considerable public interest in having the allegation determined by a jury one way or the other, I have concluded that, in this exceptional case, it is in the public interest to seek a further retrial.
‘I have taken into account submissions made to me by those representing the three defendants but, notwithstanding those submissions, I do not consider that it would be oppressive or unjust to seek a further retrial.’
A judge will now decide whether the men should face a third trial.
Lord Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism laws, said: ‘We have to trust judges of that seniority and quality to decide whether it is oppressive to have a third trial or whether, in a case of this huge importance, it is in the public interest to see whether a jury can reach a verdict.
‘It may be a verdict of guilty. It may be a verdict which may exonerate these men.’
Savant is from Stoke Newington, East London, and Khan and Zaman are both from Walthamstow, East London.
