“When our flight landed at Luton Airport from Berlin, Shafiq Rasul
was stopped at the Immigration Desk. Soon after, I was detained and questioned.
I was not told the reason for this.
The officer had initially questioned me extensively by the baggage claim,
taking notes from my answers and from my passport. When I asked what all these
questions were for, and whether this was an interview, she led me to a small
interview room and said that it was “if I want it to be”.
I gave my basic details, explained about the festival, and the film being
the reason for our visit to Berlin, which she said she believed. She said
they need to stop us and the Tipton boys as anyone with “terror links”
must be questioned – not that I had any necessarily, she said. I added
that the Tipton Three didn’t either, as is widely documented.
...
I was denied access to legal advice, supposedly officially, under powers
used to detain me. However the specific powers under which I was being held
were deliberately made unclear by the detaining Special Branch officer. She
gave me a blank copy of a “Section 7 of the Terrorism Act Detention
Form” to explain why I couldn’t contact anyone. The form stated
that someone detained under its powers can be prevented from contacting anyone,
including legal advisors, for up to 48 hours, by a superintendent officer.
I asked her whether she was a superintendent. Her reply was that I was not
in fact being held under the powers outlined in this form. I was only being
denied legal advice for the first hour of questioning, rather than 48hours.
The reason why I had been given this form was now unclear.
She left the room, and said she was bringing in a male colleague to enforce
the wallet search, since “a lot of Muslims don’t like dealing
with women do they.”
...
Under the threat of “prolonging” my detention, I cooperated in
allowing her to go through my wallet. She took detailed notes on all its contents.
All of my bankcard details were noted down, as were the details on other people’s
business cards I had in my wallet. I was searched for objects that I might
use to “hurt” the officers. However this took place about halfway
through the interview after I had been with the interviewer alone for some
time.
While searching through my wallet she asked me whether I intended to do more
documentary films, specifically more political ones like The Road to Guantanamo.
She asked “Did you become an actor mainly to do films like this, you
know, to publicise the struggles of Muslims?”.
She also asked me what my political views were, what I thought about “the
Iraq war and everything else that was going on”, whether the Iraq war
was “right” in my view.
She then asked me whether I would mind officers contacting me regularly in
the future, “in case, for example, you might be in a café, and
you overhear someone discussing illegal activities”.
...
When I told the interviewer I’d have to take a call from Gareth Peirce’s
office shortly, she said she wouldn’t allow me to. She started raising
her voice, and behaving in a more urgent and aggressive way. She called in
a male colleague who threateningly told me to give him the phone before gripping
my hands and wrestling it from me. He then sat on a table in the room, grinned
at me, winked and went through my phone. I protested, but he ignored me and
continued to go through my phone. Then a third officer entered, and all three
adopted very aggressive stances, threatening to take me to a police station,
calling me a “fucker”, moving in very close to my face, pointing
and shouting at me to “shut up and listen”. I complained at being
called a fucker. The officer who still had my phone, and who had sworn at
me, smiled at me and then said “now you’re making things up, no
one called you that”.
I finally convinced the original officer to allow me to call Ms. Peirce’s
office simply to ascertain the validity of the detention and the denial of
full access to lawyers. She agreed on condition that if I tried to ask any
further questions of the lawyer my phone would be taken away. As soon as I
got through to the lawyer, she suddenly said “we’re done with
you, you can go, whats the point in calling lawyers”. The lawyer on
the phone told the officer (again, speaking directly to her on my phone) that
he hadn’t heard of such powers existing in Section 7 of the TACT. She
changed the subject and said that I was free to go now anyway and that I was
now prolonging my detention by my own insistence on calling lawyers.
...
I asked for any notes from the interview, and for names/ranks of the officers.
I was denied both, and given a small, pink, police search record sheet - specifying
that the purpose of the search was for “intelligence” and that
I had been examined under the “TACT 2000”. The reverse of the
sheet, “Sheet 2 “which as stated on the form itself “officers
must also complete” was missing.”
