Vulnerable women and children would be affected if information is shared with the US leading to suspected IS fighters facing the death penalty, the Supreme Court has heard.

El Shafee Elsheikh and Alexanda Kotey are suspected of being part of a four-man terror cell in Syria responsible for killing Western captives.

The men, who became known as The Beatles because of their British accents, were brought up in the UK but have been stripped of their British citizenship and face trial in the US.

The Supreme Court in London is due to rule on whether the UK can share evidence against the pair with the US – a move that is opposed by the suspects’ families and human rights activists.

Mark Summers QC, a lawyer for the campaign group Reprieve, said Britons facing the death penalty abroad need to be “protected”.

He told the panel of seven justices “we oppose the death penalty in all circumstances”, adding that sharing information with the US would be a “departure from longstanding policy”.

Mr Summers said: “The lives we are talking about…are those of the vulnerable, children, women, mentally ill….political activists, victims of torture, these are the lives we are talking about…who right now sit in prison cells…relying on the government’s intervention in their case.”

Elsheikh’s mother, Maha Elgizouli, has challenged former home secretary Sajid Javid’s decision to share evidence with US authorities without assurances that the men would not be sentenced to death if they were convicted there.

She is appealing against the High Court decision in January that concluded that Mr Javid’s decision was not unlawful.

Defending “the mere provision of information” by the government, Sir James Eadie QC said “there was no irrational change of position by the home secretary (Sajid Javid)”.

Sir James described the US position as “we take your burden if you do not tie our hands”.

He added that the case raised important questions about where we draw the line for sharing information. He described the US as a “vital international partner” and questioned whether the government would provide evidence if it would stop a “bombing at a school”.

He told the Supreme Court: “It is plain that the transfer of this data was necessary and proportionate… for the conduction of an investigation at the apex of seriousness.”

During Tuesday’s hearing, the court heard from Ms Elgizouli’s counsel Edward Fitzgerald QC that her sole concern was to protect her son from the death penalty.

“She recognises the enormity of the crimes alleged against her son, Shafee Elsheikh, and against his alleged accomplice Alexanda Kotey,” he said.

“She recognises that they should face justice … but she submits that they should face justice in this country, the country of their past citizenship, the country of two of their alleged victims, and the country which has obtained the main body of evidence against them.”

The court is expected to give its ruling at a later date.

Source: Read Full Article