Paraglider Sentence Deemed Ineligible for Review by Attorney General’s Office

The Attorney General’s Office told The Epoch Times that it is unable to review the sentence given to three women who displayed images of a paraglider during a pro-Palestinian march. This came after Downing Street referred the matter following concerns about a social media post by the judge in the case.

Deputy Senior District Judge Tan Ikram decided against jailing them and gave all three a 12-month conditional discharge, saying it was a “lesson learned” for them.

But on Wednesday it emerged Judge Ikram had apparently liked a post on LinkedIn by a barrister accused of promoting a theory that Israel had allowed the Oct. 7 attack.

Judge’s Account Liked ‘Israeli Terrorist’ Post

A screen grab shared on social media appeared to show the judge’s account had liked the post by Sham Uddin, which read: “Free Free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist both in the United Kingdom, the United States, and of course Israel you can run, you can bomb but you cannot hide, justice will be coming for you.”

Downing Street referred the case to Attorney General Victoria Prentis, and said the case was “deeply troubling.”

But on Thursday the Attorney General’s Office said, in an email to The Epoch Times: “We have received a number of referrals regarding this case. Having reviewed this, we have determined that the sentences are not eligible under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme.”

Related Stories

Hamas used motorised paragliders as part of its Oct. 7 attack across the Israeli border, in which 1,200 civilians and military personnel were killed.

Ms. Alhayek and Ms. Ankunda were identified as being the two women seen on a video on social media during the march displaying the images on their backs, while Ms. Taiwo was carrying a placard which had the same image attached to it.

Defence counsel Mark Summers, KC pointed out Ms. Alhayek was from Gaza but he said, “Her and her family were outspoken critics of Hamas,” and he said she had been granted refugee status in Britain because of her “fear of persecution” by Hamas if she returned there.

Mr. Summers described the offence as “unintended” and said, “She is literally the last person on that march who would have supported that organisation.”

When he sentenced them Judge Ikram said there was no evidence any of the three defendants had supported Hamas or intended to do so by their use of the images, which he said technically showed a parachutist rather than a paraglider, which has a cradle attached.

Judge Ikram rejected the defence’s assertion the image was a symbol of “flight and escape” from Gaza, which was described during the trial as the “world’s largest outdoor prison.”

He said a “reasonable person” would see the images, in the context of the march, as referring to Hamas’s use of paragliders during the Oct. 7 attacks.

Judge Ikram said all three women had admitted they were displaying the images and he said it was irrelevant whether they had a “guilty mind, [or] mens rea,” as it was an offence of strict liability.

Judge Said ‘Emotions Run High’ on Israel

The judge said “emotions run high” on the issue of Israel and Palestine, and he said he had decided “not to punish” them. He mentioned that Claudia Mendoza, chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, found the sentence to be “woefully inadequate,” and described Judge Ikram’s remarks as “extremely surprising.”

A spokesman for the Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “We are sharing our findings with the Crown Prosecution Service, which may wish to appeal the verdict, and we are considering various legal options. We are also submitting a complaint to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.”

PA Media contributed to this report.