Streatham terror attack is a chilling reminder of how automatic early release rules are endangering British public
OUR feeble justice system should be in the dock.
British society is paying a terrible price for the disastrous official experiment in soft sentencing, which has left our streets unsafe and jihadists able to ignite terror across every corner of our country.
Yesterday’s terror attack in Streatham, London, is a chilling reminder of what has gone wrong.
In a scene of high drama, knife-wielding Islamist maniac Sudesh Amman went on a blood-soaked rampage, stabbing two people before he was shot dead by armed police officers.
The reason that the police were able to act so swiftly was that Amman was under heavy security surveillance, having just been released from prison days earlier after serving less than half of his jail sentence for a range of terrorism offences.
While the authorities deserve praise for their swiftness in ending the carnage on Streatham High Road, the far bigger question is why Amman was free at all.
Lethal assault waiting to happen
As an unreformed extremist with an appalling record, Amman belonged behind bars rather than on the public highway – he was a lethal assault waiting to happen.
His mother Haleema Khan described him today as a “lovely boy” who was only radicalised by his stint in Belmarsh prison. But she has that entirely the wrong way round.
Amman went to Belmarsh precisely because he was a dangerous radical.
In December 2018, when he was 18, he was sentenced to three years, four months, after his conviction for 13 terror offences, including the possession of weapons and the spread of extremist propaganda.
Warped fantasies
At his home in Harrow, which he shared with his family, the police had found a wealth of evidence of his “fierce interest in violence and martyrdom” as he wallowed in his fantasies of carrying out bomb or acid attacks.
As well as articles on “lone wolf” jihadism and recruitment for ISIS , he had a stash of manuals about bomb-making, knife fighting and close combat.
He not only urged his girlfriend to kill her parents because they were “kuffar” or infidels, but he also showed her beheading videos.
When he was sentenced by the court, Amman displayed not a shred of remorse, but instead laughed and smirked, while waving to his family in the gallery.
His arrogance may have been partly caused by his recognition at how leniently he had been treated by the state.
Little more than three years was a wholly inadequate term for a “knife-obsessed” zealot who represented a genuine menace to the public.
Automatic release undermining public safety
But even worse was the legal requirement to grant him automatic early release before he had even reached the halfway point in his sentence.
The rule on automatic release – an innovation introduced by the last Labour government which sees offenders released midway through their sentence on licence – has badly undermined the integrity of the justice system and the protection of the public.
In Amman’s case it was absurd given that the authorities knew he remained a terror threat. That was why he was under such intense surveillance.
For him, freedom was the opportunity, not for a fresh start, but to take his brutal regime of hatred to the next level.
The state’s eagerness to let out criminals early reflects the malign influence of the self-indulgent, irresponsible human rights brigade, which is hostile to any form of meaningful punishment.
But Amman’s case also demolishes two further cherished liberal beliefs that have perverted British justice.
One is the deluded faith in the deradicalisation programme for terrorist offenders.
This kind of wishful thinking ignores the reality that most jihadists have made a lifelong, ideological commitment to their cause.
Excuse-making for violent bigotry
The other is the theory that Islamic fundamentalism is caused by poverty or lack of education, so if these social problems are addressed, then the hatred will magically disappear.
But this has always been nonsense.
It is nothing but excuse-making for violent bigotry, as Amman’s saga indicates.
He lived in Harrow, a leafy London borough, attended Park High School – rated as “outstanding” by Ofsted in its most recent inspection – then studied maths and science at North West London College.
Another knife frenzy enabled by the state
His Streatham attack comes just weeks after a similar incident on London Bridge, when convicted terrorist Usman Khan killed two people before he was apprehended by heroic bystanders and shot dead by the police.
Like Amman, Khan’s knife frenzy had been enabled by the state, for he too had been set free halfway through his sentence under the automatic early release rule.
The grim truth is that, until the authorities get really tough with the jihadists, our society can never be at peace.
74 terrorists walking the streets early
It is estimated that there are 74 terrorists in our midst who have been let out early on licence in the last decade, with 20 of them in the capital.
Among them are Shah Rahman, who along with Usman Khan plotted to blow up the London Stock Exchange, and Amer Mirza, jailed for petrol bombing a Territorial Army base in west London.
Another 224 terrorists currently in jail are eligible for automatic early release.
And the scale of the problem could be far larger.
MI5 has warned that there are at least 3,000 Islamists in Britain, though according to Professor Anthony Glees, Director of Buckingham University’s Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies, “the real number could be anything between 6,000 and 10,000.”
This represents a brutal threat that requires a vigorous response from the Government.
So far, Boris Johnson and his Home Secretary Priti Patel have promised a major policy review, with the likelihood of an end to automatic early release, a requirement on the courts to impose tougher sentences for terrorists, and the introduction of indeterminate terms, so that offenders cannot be let out if they remain a risk.
That would all be welcome, but it must happen soon. The review cannot be allowed to drag on too long. Nor can the politicians cave in once again to the shrieking liberal lobby, whose soppiness has done so much to undermine the fight against terrorism.
What is automatic early release?
Under British law, criminals serving a determinate – or fixed – sentence of less than four years are automatically released from prison halfway through their term.
They then spend the remaining half of their sentence on licence, during which they must adhere to certain conditions like good behaviour and staying in touch with their probation officer.
This has been the case since 2005, when the provisions of the 2003 Criminal Justice Act were implemented.
Lags serving a determinate sentence of more than four years can also be released at the halfway point, but this doesn’t happen automatically – a parole board must agree to it.
In the cases of those serving an indeterminate – non-fixed – or life sentence, the UK Government has to apply for parole on the prisoner’s behalf.
The intention of early release is to rehabilitate prisoners in the community while managing the populations inside Britain’s overcrowded prisons.
However, recent atrocities including the Streatham stabbing and the deadly London Bridge attack in November – carried out by convicted terrorist Usman Khan while he was on probation – have raised questions about the rules.
In the wake of the bridge atrocity, the Government proposed a raft of changes, including scrapping early release for those classed as dangerous and giving those convicted of serious offences like preparing acts of terrorism a minimum of 14 years behind bars.
Today, PM Boris Johnson vowed to crack down on the early release of terrorist prisoners – although it’s not clear how any changes would be applied to existing cases.
“We are bringing forward legislation to stop the system of automatic early release. The difficulty is how to apply retrospectively to the cohort of people who currently qualify,” he said.
Extortionate surveillance costs
Anti-prison campaigners will, as usual, bleat about the costs of keeping more prisoners inside for longer.
But at £38,000 per place each year, jail is a bargain compared to the huge, multi-million-pound costs of running surveillance round the clock on dangerous released terrorists.
One retired police detective said yesterday that it takes a team of 32 officers to mount an effective operation on an individual target for 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
On a deeper level, the Government must also show confidence in our democratic, tolerant British values.
Too often in the past, the official fixation with multiculturalism, combined with the fear of accusations of racism, means that the authorities have been reluctant to challenge destructive alien practices, like extremism, misogyny or child abuse.
The Rotherham scandal, where predatory sex gangs preyed on vulnerable white girls, was a classic example of this trait.
That sort of institutionalised cringing has to end if we are to live in a harmonious society.
In delivering Brexit, Boris has passed his first big test.
Now, in the wake of the Streatham and London Bridge attacks, he faces another.