Lord Alton of Liverpool and Others v Secretary of Dtate for the Home Department; POAC 30 Nov 2007

References: PC/02/2006
Links: swarb.co.uk, statewatch
Coram: Sir Harry Ognall C, Boswell QC, Catchpole QC
The Mujaheddin-e-Khalq had been proscribed under the 2000 Act by the respondent. It now appealed against such proscription.
Held: The organisation had in the past used terrorist methods, but had repeatedly now renounced the use of violence. The proscription could not be upheld.
Sir Harry Ognall said: ‘We have reached the clear conclusion that the Secretary of State had reasonable grounds for believing that the PMOI was responsible for the attacks listed and, more importantly, to conclude that the PMOI had carried out many attacks over an extended period of time and that the examples set out in Mr Fender’s witness statement demonstrated the range and severity of the terrorist activities in which the PMOI had historically been involved.’ However, there had been a significant change in the MeK’s activities dating from June 2001 onwards, and that the MeK could no longer be said to be concerned with terrorism within the meaning of section 3 of the Terrorism Act.’
Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 3(3)(b)
This case is cited by: