Examination of Witnesses (Questions 260
- 279)
THURSDAY 21 FEBRUARY 2008
JAGDEESH, IMRAN,
AJMAL, ANITA,
KIRANJIT AND
MEENA
Q260 Mrs Cryer: Does anyone else
want to talk about going to the police and possible criminalisation?
Anita: I did report it two times
but the police just wrote a report and they said they would come
back to me. They never phoned me back and they did not help me
or anything; they did not take my case seriously—never.
Sometimes I thought there is no point calling the police because
they did not help me.
Kiranjit: I went to the police
twice and both times I was told, "Well, it is your personal
problem; you have to sort it out yourself; we do not want to get
involved." I went to the police and the man was standing
there in uniform and he said, "There must be something wrong
with you. You must have done something wrong." Where would
I go? I had no family, no community, no police, no law.
Q261 Mrs Cryer: Does anyone else
want to add anything?
Ajmal: I went to the police on
a number of occasions, that was abroad and in the UK. In some
families you have got family members who are working in high places,
certain people who they know. Even the police will not take any
action. Instead of taking any action they just turn around and
say, "No, he is just a kid and he is lost," and they
will help the family members again instead of helping that child
out.
Jagdeesh: In respect of my sister's
case I immediately approached two police stations, one in West
London in Hayes and one in Coventry, my home town then, and on
both occasions I was very coldly turned away. I explained to them
I had a sister, she had not come back, she was in the thick of
a troubled marriage and I feared the worst. She had clearly disappeared
and I feared that she may have been a victim of an honour killing.
On both occasions from two sergeants I received the response,
"If she has disappeared abroad, even though she is a permanent
UK citizen and a resident, it is not our business. It is not for
us to register a case much less investigate it." I came away
very despondent and disempowered. Only now nine years later do
we have a legal conviction in the very country where the police
officers did not want to take any action. It is a horrible blockage
right at the initial process of when the case critically needs
to be reported and actioned. To have misinformed, inactive officers
at the very heart of an institution that you need help from, I
think is fundamentally unjust; it is horrible; it is a grave problem.
On the second question, I would solidly support the proposal of
criminalising forced marriage despite the variations of opinion
on that, just like we have criminalised, and have done so for
many years, the act of racial harassment and racial attacks. People
commit racial attacks secretly, as they always will. People will
carry out forced marriages secretly but unless there is a legal
deterrent, people will carry on trying to duck and dive and so
forth.
Q262 Mrs Cryer: No-one suggested
to you that you should go to the Foreign Office and through them—
Jagdeesh: Nobody suggested that.
We were completely left adrift. We had to use our own initiative.
It was only down to the fact that I have a long history of human
rights campaigns and I had a bit of a skill in writing letters
to relevant people like MPs and the media that we managed to lift
up Surjit's case out of a dead water case and take it forward.
We went to the Foreign Office of our own volition; we went to
the MP of our own volition; and we pressed on with the police
of our own volition. It was only because I had a friend who happened
to know somebody in the Serious Crime Squad in the Metropolitan
Police that we managed to get a meeting with them, but as far
as the local police stations were concerned: "It is not something
that we want to deal with."
Mrs Cryer: I think Martin wants a quick
question.
Q263 Martin Salter: Two questions,
Jagdeesh. Which were the MPs that got involved with it? John McDonnell
was one.
Jagdeesh: He got involved a bit
later, although he, I have to confess, played a bit of a double
role in this and I will not go into that. The MP that initially
took it up was Bob Ainsworth in Coventry.
Q264 Martin Salter: I know Bob. Okay,
the second question: what was the point at which the Metropolitan
Police or was it the West Midlands Police—
Jagdeesh: No, it was the Metropolitan
Place.
Q265 Martin Salter:—at what
point was it that the Metropolitan Police accepted that although
the murder took place in the Punjab, the conspiracy to commit
the murder and planning of the murder took place in Britain and
therefore it was a matter for British jurisdiction?
Jagdeesh: It was approximately
five or six days after Surjit should have returned and she did
not that we managed to get a face-to-face meeting with a group
of officers from the Serious Crime Squad in the Met Police. At
that meeting they gave us an optimistic picture. They felt the
case was serious enough to take forward and they began their enquiries.
Enquiries were begun. For years into the enquiry post December
1998 the officers leading the enquiry were themselves not convinced
that anything harmful had happened to Surjit. I recall the lead
officer within a matter of weeks declaring to the media that—of
his own volition and I do not know what prompted him—that
Surjit may not have returned home but there was nothing to suggest
anything had happened to her. I personally believe he should not
even have made that statement. Beyond that for years and year
Surjit's case continued to be treated as a possible disappearance
but certainly not a murder yet, and it was not until many years
into the investigation and with the introduction of new officers
onto the case that in 2004 we saw this massive turnaround in the
speed and the thoroughness of the case and, as a result of that
massive change in attitude, we saw the prosecution in 2007. It
demonstrated very cruelly and very vividly that attitudes amongst
officers can have such a fundamental effect on whether a case
is taken forward or a line is drawn on the case to say, "No
more enquiries."
Q266 Martin Salter: Just for the
record, although it was slow and not going anywhere, the investigation
was triggered within how long? How long did it take from you being
given the brush-off by the sergeant in the police station to the
point at which the investigation kicked off?
Jagdeesh: Approximately five days
later we had a meeting with the Serious Crime Squad but they did
not begin their enquiries until several weeks later.
Martin Salter: That is helpful, thank
you.
Mrs Cryer: Gwyn Prosser is going to ask
some questions on the same topic. As I am struggling, if everyone
agrees, I am going to sit there so I can hear. You are going to
ask Kiranjit some questions.
Q267 Gwyn Prosser: It is pretty clear
to us that the British criminal justice system let you down terribly
from the very start from your first approaches to the police and
then when your case came to court the first time. But through
your efforts and those of the people who were supporting you,
you have been successful in changing the law for the better, not
just for yourself but for persons, or in remembrance perhaps of
women and some men, who have been abused and them being able claim,
quite rightly, provocation. Many of us go through life achieving
very little, but with all the agony that you have gone through
I am sure that gives you some comfort that you have been able
to make those changes. Can you compare the two court cases, the
first court case when you were very much the criminal, the accused,
and no-one wanted to listen to your story of provocation, just
what you did and when you did it, compared with the second court
case when the law had been changed and there was far more accommodation
for your wider story?
Kiranjit: At my first trial I
had faith in British law. I thought it is a modern country and
they will understand. There was the police report, the doctor's
report, family evidence, my husband's family's evidence was there.
I had full faith and I thought I will be out. Because I was so
depressed and I could not speak good English, half the time I
did not know what was happening in the court and I did not give
my evidence. At my trial there were 50 pages of evidence by my
solicitor because I was so depressed and I could not speak English
and I did not know anything of what was happening around. I was
thinking more of my children and my family who were suffering.
I was shocked when I ended up with a life sentence. I lost my
own hopes and then suddenly Southall Black Sisters came into my
life. They took my statement and they translated my story and
instead of 50 pages there were 500 pages. They found a good solicitor
who understood the Hindi language as well. With that, they visited
me in prison and it was counselling for me as well; I was coming
out. They did very good work, the campaigned, wrote lots of letters
and all these petitions and thousands of people signed the petitions.
My life totally changed and I was gaining more and more confidence.
The prison officers were very good as well; they did understand.
So the second time it was very different. I only wished I had
gone to Southall Black Sisters before and maybe I would not have
ended up with a life sentence. They did explain family honour
through my solicitor properly and my husband's family wrote letters
to the court and I felt totally different at my trial.
Q268 Gwyn Prosser: And with the experience
you had, how would you recommend people in your position should
be supported through the court case once the court case comes
round? Can you think of any ways that the organisation could support
you more?
Kiranjit: As I said before, if
I knew Southall Black Sisters then I would not have ended up with
a life sentence. Before that even when I was suffering with my
husband I should have gone to the police and I should have gone
to Southall Black Sisters. They could speak for me and make them
understand my situation. They could support me better than the
police did. As I said, the policeman said, "There must be
something wrong with you Mrs (name given). We do not want to get
involved. I wish I knew Southall Black Sisters then. Even after
16 years, after I have raised my sons—both sons have graduated
now and the second one is doing law—I still use the centre
and I go there whenever I need their advice and many, many women
still have their advice as well so we need this centre very badly.
Q269 Gwyn Prosser: My next question
is for Anita. Anita, when you were taken by your father-in-law
to your distant friend's house, you were brave enough to inform
the police. I understand from your story that you returned back
to the family. What can you tell us about that?
Anita: Actually I went to a friend's
house and she said to me, "I will give you only one day because
my son is coming back and I cannot keep you in the house."
Then I came back by bus to near my house at the bus stop and I
cried there. One English guy saw me crying and he asked me my
problem. I said that my husband had kicked me out of the house
and he said, "I will keep you inside my house." Then
he said, "I have some family from India and maybe she will
help you." Then I went to her house and she kept me and I
rang the police station from there. The police came. I phoned
at 2 o'clock or 3 o'clock and the police come at 10 o'clock at
night. The police wrote a report and everything and the police
said to the lady, "At this time we have not got any accommodation
for her. Can you keep her for one day more in your house?"
The lady said, "Okay, I will keep her for one day but not
more than one day." Then after the police called back they
did not say anything. At that time I did not have any job, money
or accommodation. That is why I went back to my father-in-law's
house.
Q270 Gwyn Prosser: So you had no
other alternative, you were forced to go back?
Anita: Yes because I did not have
any choice. Where would I go? There is a stamp on my passport
(inaudible). I went to many organisations at that time but everyone
said there is no recourse to public funds; that is why we cannot
help you.
Q271 Gwyn Prosser: In my view that
is an area where the Committee will be giving a strong recommendation
for filling that gap. Lots of us cannot understand why there is
that gap in the system. It seems so totally inhumane and your
example proves the point, I think. Jagdeesh, if I can ask you
about your case. We are all terribly impressed by the work you
put in to fight for eventual justice. You managed to get a conviction
although your sister's body is still not found. Why were you able
to do that? Can you tell us about that?
Jagdeesh: The absence of my sister's
body was a major feature to the case and
***
Fortunately, there was enough legal argument and
aspects of British law, as highlighted by the judge, that even
though there is the absence of a body, it does not preclude a
murder conviction. The fact that there was no body to hand did
drag the case down in many ways, not least in the fact that along
the way there were huge tussles going on within the Metropolitan
Police, I have to say, now that I am aware of what did go on after
the conviction, within the team of officers. "There is no
body so what the hell are we playing at? Why should we be investigating
something for which there is no body?" The case is 5,000
miles away, it is an Indian case, it is not British case so why
are we investigating that, it should be investigated by the Punjab
police." All sorts of tussles were going on. There were officers
who said there was no body and the killing was overseas but the
conspiracy was here and we must investigate. There were those
officers and there were officers who said, "I'm not interested.
I don't really want to invest time in this. Surjit's case for
years and years suffered this confusion of contradictory attitudes
and dragged itself along in the system until all of a sudden,
I would say with God's good doing, we had this fantastic new team
who took over the case in 2004 and made the world of difference
on it.
***
That is what the destruction of her body was designed
to do a) so that there was no evidence to hand and b) so that
it may preclude an investigation even getting underway because
if you have no body to hand you have no evidence. Fortunately,
and I have to commend English law for this, in English law there
was an unknown, rather unrecognised feature of English law, as
highlighted by the judge, that the lack of a body does not preclude
a case going forward like this and it does not preclude a murder
conviction.
Q272 Gwyn Prosser: Drawing on your
experience, are there any areas of the law or procedures—and
you have shared some of them with us already with regards to the
putdown which you had almost from the first enquiries but beyond
that—that you think we could practically change our procedures
and the criminal law to help cases like yours?
Jagdeesh: I think one of the gaping
fundamentally huge issues that
***
Many such cases of honour killing—not all but
many—are of such a nature; that you carry out the killing
overseas to avoid all the immediate suspicion and investigations
here. What this case massively suffered from was a failure by
the official bodies like the Foreign Office and the British Government
to effectively co-operate and communicate or push for formal co-operation
from the other end. Surjit's case remained stagnant and stuck
at the doors of the Foreign Office. I hate to keep saying this
but what fundamentally happened was that whilst the UK police
were trying to do their bit—and the good officers certainly
did a damn good job at it—they were constantly being held
back and disabled by the fact they were not getting due co-operation
from the other end. That due co-operation would have been greatly
achieved had senior people in the right departments of government
pressed the right buttons which they could have, and have indeed
done so on other cases like Lucie Blackman, Kirsty Jones, Gillian
Gibbons, Peter Bleach and Ian Stillman. Had they applied the same
diplomatic official pressure, I believe Surjit's case would have
been solved within approximately three to four years of her disappearing
as against the nine years that it actually took. That remains
a gaping issue—the failure of co-operation between two states
through established channels. We are seeing a repetition of that
same gaping fundamental flaw in the new case of Manjit Kular who
again is a resident of Hounslow, who arrived in the Punjab and
all of a sudden there is this mysterious car accident and the
UK police are stuck in exactly the same complications now because
they are not getting co-operation from the other end.
Q273 Mrs Cryer: We are talking about
the Indian Punjab, are we not?
Jagdeesh: The Indian Punjab.
Q274 Mrs Cryer: I just wanted to
make sure. Margaret Moran and I are going to ask you a few questions
about support and advice. My question will be to all of you. What
kind of support was or would have been most valuable to you in
leaving your situation and rebuilding your life, for example,
counselling, accommodation, friendship, et cetera? What would
you recommend that the Government should do to improve support
for victims? Who wants to start?
Imran: If I could have turned
to someone with personal experience—
Q275 Mrs Cryer: I am sorry, could
you speak up.
Imran: If I could have turned
to someone with personal experiences who I could relate to for
support, I would have. For the Government my suggestion is a male
refuge for men, which is highly needed. Due to my caseload I have
44 Asian male victims of domestic violence and forced marriages
and honour-based violence and at the moment there is nowhere for
them to go, just hostels and YMCAs. A lot of males phone me saying,
"Where am I supposed to go?" and when I say YMCAs and
hostels, they just do not want to leave.
Q276 Mrs Cryer: What sort of support
would you have needed at the time that would have helped you greatly?
Kiranjit: I think centres like
Southall Black Sisters. They know the language and they can provide
help. They have knowledge of the law and about accommodation and
refuges, things like that. In my life it was very important. For
people like me who are suffering domestic violence, they do not
have any place to go or leave, and they can always turn up to
the centre like Southall Black Sisters or a Women Aid's centre
or a refuge (inaudible)
Q277 Mrs Cryer: Would anyone else
like to comment on that?
Anita: The first time we need
support with accommodation. My ex-husband kicked out me so many
times from the house and I was kept outside, and then I did not
have any accommodation. I needed accommodation. When I went to
leave I asked for help and I think maybe the council did not have
any type of help or anything because they had no recourse to public
funds for our type of women. Maybe to change this rule is a good
thing and we can find out some benefits from another side, like
the council or the civic centre, I do not know.
Meena: Anita is saying that there
should be benefits and taxes for support through the council.
The government should provide benefits for people like her.
Anita: I went to so many places
and so many organisations but they saw my passport and they said
they had no recourse to public funds and that is why they could
not help me. I had no choice.
Mrs Cryer: Thank you very much, Anita.
Margaret Moran is going to ask some questions.
Q278 Margaret Moran: You have just
answered one of my questions already so if I can ask you Ajmal,
that same question, which was what would have helped you in those
circumstances? You have already articulated that there is a great
deal of prejudice and difficulty in men reporting their situation,
but what would be the one thing that would have really helped
you in your situation?
Ajmal: I agree with Imran when
he says that there are no male refuges, which are needed. When
I first came to Derby I had to live at the YMCA but obviously
there is a lot of drug use and alcohol and you do feel suicidal
and there is no support for that. There is no advertisement out
there as well. There needs to be awareness with posters or advertisements.
Q279 Margaret Moran: So awareness
as well? Thank you very much. Kiranjit, we talked earlier on,
I asked you questions about domestic violence, are you aware now
of services for domestic violence—and you have mentioned
the Southall Black Sisters—but any other services that tackle
domestic violence? Had you been aware of them when you were in
your situation, would they have been helpful to you, or do you
feel that there need to be services that are specifically for
Asian or black women?
Kiranjit: Before I went to prison
I did not know anything about Women's Aid or women's centres.
After my release Southall Black Sisters helped me. After I was
freed I worked for nearly eight months at their offices as a volunteer
and I got to know so many Women's Aid and women's centres like
Southall Black Sisters when I was working there and I was very
shocked at the amount of women coming to their office, not only
Asian women but Black, English, Pakistani, and they were all asking
for help. These people were English and Punjabi and they understand
all the (inaudible) as well. Even today they are getting letters
from Pakistan, India and China from women who are suffering there.
They are asking us to be their support. They are demanding they
should open one of their offices in their country so they can
have help. I know now and that is why I think it is very important
to have more publicity for the centre. When I heard that they
are suffering, they are not getting enough funding, I wanted to
help. I did a 12-hour night shift last night and I have not had
a good sleep and I am going back tonight again. That is why I
am here. I think it is very important. These people are giving
our lives back to us and our children's.
Anita: I echo that.
Margaret Moran: Thank you. You are a
very good advocate for not just Southall Black Sisters but a very
serious point; we need more resources to support women in this
situation. Thank you very much.
| 
