This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/30/jean-charles-de-menezes-police-officers-shouldshould-not-be-prosecuted-echr
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Jean Charles de Menezes: police officers should not be prosecuted, says ECHR | Jean Charles de Menezes: police officers should not be prosecuted, says ECHR |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The police officers who killed Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005 mistakenly believing he was a suicide bomber should not be prosecuted, the European court of human rights has ruled. | The police officers who killed Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005 mistakenly believing he was a suicide bomber should not be prosecuted, the European court of human rights has ruled. |
| The decision by the Strasbourg court brings to an end a controversy that has lasted more than a decade following the Brazilian electrician’s death in Stockwell tube station, south London. | The decision by the Strasbourg court brings to an end a controversy that has lasted more than a decade following the Brazilian electrician’s death in Stockwell tube station, south London. |
| Related: Who was Jean Charles de Menezes? | Related: Who was Jean Charles de Menezes? |
| A string of police blunders led members of the force’s elite armed unit, CO19, to open fire with their guns just 1cm to 8cm away from De Menezes’ head as he was pinned down into a seat on an underground train. | A string of police blunders led members of the force’s elite armed unit, CO19, to open fire with their guns just 1cm to 8cm away from De Menezes’ head as he was pinned down into a seat on an underground train. |
| He died instantly on 22 July 2005; it was a fortnight after suicide bombings in London killed 56 people. De Menezes lived at the same block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London, as two of the terror suspects and had been followed by surveillance officers to Stockwell station when he left for work that morning. | He died instantly on 22 July 2005; it was a fortnight after suicide bombings in London killed 56 people. De Menezes lived at the same block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London, as two of the terror suspects and had been followed by surveillance officers to Stockwell station when he left for work that morning. |
| The Crown Prosecution Service decided the following year that no individual should face charges. The challenge to the CPS refusal to prosecute the officers was brought by Patricia Armani Da Silva, who is De Menezes’ cousin. | |
| The case was heard in the grand chamber of the ECHR, which deals with cases potentially affecting interpretation of the European convention of human rights. | The case was heard in the grand chamber of the ECHR, which deals with cases potentially affecting interpretation of the European convention of human rights. |
| By a majority of 13 to four, the judges ruled that the UK had not violated article two of the European Convention of Human Rights which guarantees the right to life. | By a majority of 13 to four, the judges ruled that the UK had not violated article two of the European Convention of Human Rights which guarantees the right to life. |
| “The decision not to prosecute any individual officer was not due to any failings in the investigation or the state’s tolerance of or collusion in unlawful acts,” the court declared, “rather, it was due to the fact that, following a thorough investigation, a prosecutor had considered all the facts of the case and concluded that there was insufficient evidence against any individual officer to prosecute.” | “The decision not to prosecute any individual officer was not due to any failings in the investigation or the state’s tolerance of or collusion in unlawful acts,” the court declared, “rather, it was due to the fact that, following a thorough investigation, a prosecutor had considered all the facts of the case and concluded that there was insufficient evidence against any individual officer to prosecute.” |
| The ECHR acknowledged that all the UK independent authorities considering the actions of the two firearms officers “had carefully examined the reasonableness of their belief that Jean Charles de Menezes had been a suicide bomber who could detonate a bomb at any second”. | |
| The Strasbourg court also accepted that the evidential test applied by the CPS in deciding whether to prosecute, had been within the state’s discretion - what is known legally as its “margin of appreciation”. | |
| The test applied in England and Wales had not been “arbitrary”, having been the subject of frequent reviews, public consultations and political scrutiny, the court added. Nor is there a uniform, alternative approach by other European states to the evidential test employed | |
| The ECHR dismissed claims that Article 2 required the evidential test to be lowered in cases where deaths had occurred at the hands of state agents. | |
| The ruling did not surprise commentators and follows changes adopted by Strasbourg, with UK supporrt, which have effectively enlarged each country’s margin of appreciation in cases. | |
| Had the ECHR ruled the other way, it would have created fresh crisis in the UK government’s relations with the European human rights judges. The government’s proposed Bill of Rights, which will alter the UK’s judicial relationship with Strasbourg, is now not expected to be published until after the EU referendum. | |
| In the De Menezes case, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) decided in 2007 that no disciplinary action should be pursued against any of the frontline and surveillance officers since there was no realistic prospect of any disciplinary charges being upheld. | |
| The Metropolitan police authority was, however, found liable under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 for De Menezes’ death due to failings in the operation’s planning and implementation. | The Metropolitan police authority was, however, found liable under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 for De Menezes’ death due to failings in the operation’s planning and implementation. |
| It was fined £175,000 plus £385,000 costs but in a rider to its verdict, endorsed by the judge, the jury absolved the officer in charge of the operation of any “personal culpability” for the events. | It was fined £175,000 plus £385,000 costs but in a rider to its verdict, endorsed by the judge, the jury absolved the officer in charge of the operation of any “personal culpability” for the events. |
| At an inquest in 2008 the jury returned an open verdict after the coroner had excluded unlawful killing from the range of possible verdicts. The family also pursued a civil action that resulted in a confidential settlement in 2009. | At an inquest in 2008 the jury returned an open verdict after the coroner had excluded unlawful killing from the range of possible verdicts. The family also pursued a civil action that resulted in a confidential settlement in 2009. |
| Harriet Wistrich, the solicitor at the London law firm Birnberg Peirce who represents the De Menezes family, argued that the CPS decision not to bring any prosecution was based on an assessment that there was, in effect, less than a 50% chance of conviction. That test, it will be argued, is not compatible with article 2 of the European convention which protects the right to life. | Harriet Wistrich, the solicitor at the London law firm Birnberg Peirce who represents the De Menezes family, argued that the CPS decision not to bring any prosecution was based on an assessment that there was, in effect, less than a 50% chance of conviction. That test, it will be argued, is not compatible with article 2 of the European convention which protects the right to life. |
| Applying guidelines set by the code for crown prosecutors too early, Wistrich had said, when prosecutors have not seen witnesses give oral evidence, means that the test can prevent homicide offences from being punished. The threshold in other European states, it is argued, is not set so high as to require a conviction to be “more likely than not”. | Applying guidelines set by the code for crown prosecutors too early, Wistrich had said, when prosecutors have not seen witnesses give oral evidence, means that the test can prevent homicide offences from being punished. The threshold in other European states, it is argued, is not set so high as to require a conviction to be “more likely than not”. |