Connect with us

Opinion

A no-deal Brexit will leave both Europe and Britain more exposed to terrorists and organised crime

Published

on

no-deal Brexit will leave both Europe and Britain more exposed

With exactly five months to go until the UK is scheduled to leave the European Union, the 28-nation bloc appears no nearer to striking a deal with the British government over what Brexit will actually look like. Sticking to their “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” mantra, EU chiefs are understandably playing hardball with the UK, keen not to offer London a deal that might encourage other nations to bail out of the union. As things stand, a no-deal Brexit is looking increasingly likely, which would mean the UK crashing out of the EU with no 21-month transition period in March next year, forcing it to revert to World Trade Organisation rules on trade, withdraw fully from the customs union and lose membership of various European regulatory bodies overnight.

Remainers fear such a scenario could result in severe economic hardship for the least well-off in Britain, and might even cause food and drug shortages. Whether or not this actually comes to pass, what is more worrying is the two sides’ failure to arrive at an agreement on security cooperation. While it is one thing to use potential trade deals, free movement and citizen residency status as bargaining chips in the Brexit negotiations, it is quite another to play fast and loose with security partnerships on which Britain, the EU and the wider world depend.

Security arrangements should have been ring-fenced from the main Brexit negotiations from day one, allowing law enforcement agencies in Britain and the EU to continue sharing intelligence and crime-fighting tools regardless of what was agreed in other areas. The fact this did not happen means both Europe and the UK could be facing a less secure future, all on account of negotiators refusing to recognise that the safety of every citizen of the EU and Britain should take precedence over relatively petty squabbles over far less important matters.

Speaking with the BBC last week, Lynne Owens, chief of the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA), warned that a no-deal Brexit could result in British investigators losing access to key crime-fighting tools such as the European Arrest Warrant and the shared Schengen information system database. Noting how the NCA is working closely with law enforcement partners across Europe over the potential security consequences of a no-deal Brexit, Owens said Britain’s ability to share intelligence and jointly investigate crimes could be significantly impacted, affecting UK law enforcement agencies’ fight against serious and organised crime.

For the EU’s part, it risks losing access to vital British intelligence if no deal can be struck. Speaking in June this year at Nato’s headquarters in Brussels, GCHQ Director Jeremy Fleming told an audience that police in four European countries foiled planned terrorist operations last year thanks to intelligence provided by the UK. Fleming also highlighted how a number other European countries had enjoyed access to classified intelligence shared by Britain on cyber crime.

Just how much the UK stands to lose security-wise if it crashes out of the EU with no deal was last week laid bare in a new report from the National Audit Office (NAO). The agency warned that organised criminal networks are preparing to take full advantage of Britain’s failure to put systems in place to protect its borders once it leaves the union. In its report, the NAO cautions that the UK is on course not to deliver 11 out of the 12 critical border management upgrades that need to be in place before Brexit.

Commenting on the report, NAO boss Amyas Morse said: “Government has openly accepted the border will be sub-optimal if there is no deal with the EU on 29 March 2019. It is not clear what sub-optimal means in practice, or how long this will last. But what is clear is that businesses and individuals who are reliant on the border running smoothly will pay the price.”

It may well be the case that both sides in the Brexit negotiations are indulging in brinkmanship, and that a deal will be struck at the eleventh hour. But with time running out, things are coming dangerously close to the wire. If the UK crashes out of the EU, there will be a very real possibility that people in both Europe and Britain could be considerably less safe at the end of March next year than they are now. This will be a direct result of politicians using the issue as a bargaining chip in negotiations; a move that could end up making things much easier for organised criminal gangs and terrorist groups, and in a worst case scenario could even result in the loss of life.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Governments are right to do all they can to prevent Daesh foreign fighters returning ‘home’

Published

on

prevent Daesh foreign fighters returning ‘home’

Since the fall of Daesh’s so-called caliphate in Syria back in March, numerous countries have faced criticism for failing to repatriate and put on trial their nationals who travelled to the Middle East to join the jihadi group. In the wake of the extremist organisation’s final territorial defeat in the Syrian town of Baghouz some three months ago, multiple media organisations from all over the world have combed refugee camps such as al-Hol in the north-east of the country in search of jihadi fighters from their countries, with the resultant coverage prompting calls from politicians and commentators for governments to take back their radicalised nationals and make sure they face justice at “home”.

Earlier this week, UN human rights chief Michelle Bachelet became the latest such voice, calling on countries to assume responsibility for their citizens and take them back if they cannot be prosecuted where they are. But in many cases, these calls are quite rightly being rejected, with several countries refusing to welcome back individuals who have likely become hardened jihadis during their time with the group.

Former and current British nationals are among some of the most notorious foreign Daesh fighters and supporters presently languishing in limbo in migrant camps and prisons across Syria, where a number have become stranded after the UK government rescinded their citizenship. Shamima Begum, who was aged just 15 when she fled Britain to join Daesh back in 2015, was stripped of her UK nationality in February. El Shafee Elsheikh and Alexanda Kotey, who were members of a Daesh cell that is said to have been responsible for the torture and execution of a number of prisoners, had their UK citizenships revoked in July of last year, prompting reports that the pair could be extradited to the US, where they could face the death penalty.

All three held dual nationality, allowing the British government to strip them of their citizenship without leaving them stateless, which would have been against international law. Back in April, El País spoke with three Spanish women who travelled to Syria to join Daesh at the al-Hol refugee camp. Yolanda Martínez, Luna Fernández and Lubna Miludi, who explained how they travelled with their husbands to Syria in 2014, are still waiting for a decision to be made about their potential repatriation to Spain.

Meanwhile, other countries have been more sympathetic to their citizens who decided to risk everything by travelling to Daesh’s so-called caliphate while the group was at the peak of its powers. Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan are said to have repatriated 756 of their nationals who travelled to join Daesh so far, while Belgium, Sweden and Australia have all worked to take back relatives of Deash fighters who have a legal claim to live in those countries. The actions these nations have taken have been used as examples of how governments should behave by commentators and “experts” who believe that countries have a duty to do all they can to bring Daesh fighters and supporters home, and that the extremists themselves have a right to return to the communities they abandoned to live under a jihadi death cult. When asked, members of the public in countries to which radicalised Islamist extremists wish to return quite sensibly say it would be better if they remained where they are.

For its part, the US government appears to have remained steadfast in refusing to allow one American-born “jihadi bride” to return home from Syria, arguing that the diplomatic status of her father at the time she was born means she does not qualify for US citizenship. Despite this, US President Donald Trump has been critical of EU nations that have refused to repatriate their Daesh fighters. While it is true that the US government did recently bring back several women and children who had been captured with fighters from the group, the inordinately sensible decision the White House made in the case of Hoda Muthana should act as a model for any government whose first priority is keeping its people safe from harm. If there is any way of doing so legally, individuals who travelled to join terrorist organisations abroad should be prevented from returning to the country they left.

Where possible, foreign nationals who have been captured after travelling to the region to join Daesh should be tried by local courts,  as happened in May when three French men were sentenced to death in Iraq for offences relating to their membership of the group. As has been suggested by France, countries whose nationals are currently in Syrian refugee camps and jails could contribute to an international tribunal designed to bring these people to justice in the countries in which they committed their crimes. However they are dealt with though, leaders are right to seek to prevent battle-hardened foreign Daesh fighters from returning to their home countries where they might pose a significant risk to innocent members of the public.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Western nations must ban the ‘transplant tourism’ that is costing Chinese prisoners of conscience their lives

Published

on

transplant tourism’

Regardless of how wealthy you are, the likelihood is in most western nations that you will need to join a lengthy waiting list if you are told you require an organ transplant. Unfortunately, owing to a major shortage of organ donors in most countries, many people on these lists die before they can secure the new body parts they require. In the US, 20 people pass away each day while in search of a suitable donor, while in the UK more than a quarter of those waiting for a transplant can except to lose their lives before a suitable match becomes available. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this pushes many transplant patients who can afford to do so to seek out alternatives abroad, even though the trade in human organs is illegal in most countries across the globe. This has led to the emergence of a thriving black market in harvested organs, which are typically taken from the bodies of vulnerable healthy donors.

While in many cases organ brokers source body parts from impoverished, poorly educated individuals in developing countries who are typically paid a paltry sum in exchange for their sacrifice, some donors are compelled to give up their organs against their will, a large number of whom die as a consequence of doing so. Many of these donors fall victim to the organised criminal networks that control the illicit global trade in human organs, but in some cases, nation states have become involved in the harvesting of body parts, and are profiting from the misery on which the trade is based.

Earlier this week, the International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse warned that China is continuing to kill prisoners from religious minorities such as Falun Gong for their organ, despite having said in 2014 that it would stop doing so. A tribunal convened by the coalition found that transplant waiting lists at Chinese hospitals are incredibly short, and that as many as 90,000 transplant operations a year are being carried out across the country, which is a far higher number than government figures suggest.

The tribunal’s findings have piled pressure on western governments to ban so-called transplant tourism to countries such as China, and have resulted in calls for doctors and medical organisations across the globe to stop working with the country in fields relating to organ transplantation. But whether its revelations will result in real change anytime soon remains to be seen. While several western governments across the globe are considering legalisation to ban transplant tourism, there appears to be little urgency when it comes to pushing these new laws through in some countries.

In Canada, a bill that would outlaw organ tourism is currently awaiting Senate approval, but might not receive it by the end of the current parliamentary session. Over in America, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution back in 2016 that condemned “state-sanctioned forced organ harvesting” and called for a US State Department investigation and new restrictions, neither of which have been forthcoming. In March of this year, a cross-party group of British MPs called for a ban on UK citizens travelling to China for organ transplant operations, urging the UK government to impose similar restrictions to those imposed by Italy, Spain, Israel and Taiwan. Since then, no action has been taken.

The UK’s Daily Telegraph this week revealed that children and adults at risk of being killed for their organs are fleeing to Britain in greater number, albeit from a very low starting point. It has been reported elsewhere in recent years that terrorist organisations such as Daesh stole organs from captured enemy fighters to treat its injured militants, and that people smuggling gangs have started taking organs from migrants as payment for being smuggled into their countries of choice. Sad as it is, there is often little western nations can do to prevent practices such as these, abhorrent as they may be.

Things are different with China though. In the face of substantial evidence that the Chinese state is complicit in the murder of prisoners for their organs, the global community has a responsibility to make it clear that this type of barbarism will not be tolerated. Putting the question of whether it is ethical to allow people to willingly sell their internal organs aside for a moment, it surely cannot be right for a nation state to sanction the murder of prisoners solely for the purpose of using their body parts in transplant operations, many of which can cost many tens of thousands of dollars. While desperate people with the financial means to do so will always go to great lengths to secure the organs they need to stay alive, western nations in particular must do all they can to stop China profiting from a brutal trade that sees the country’s prisoners of conscience treated as commodity.

 

Continue Reading

Opinion

Only a total ban on secondary sales can stamp out music and sports ticket fraud

Published

on

music and sports ticket fraud

Music fans and sports enthusiasts across the globe will often go to great lengths to secure tickets to events involving their favourite artists or teams, with a significant number routinely willing to pay multiple times the face value of tickets from a reseller should a concert or game they wished to attend have sold out. For many, the desire to get hold of tickets to these types of events can be so strong that their judgement can become clouded, resulting in some would-be revellers or spectators taking financial risks they might not in other circumstances. Organised criminals have become adept at exploiting this passion, raking in millions by selling sports and music lovers counterfeit tickets, often at hugely inflated prices. The illicit trade has continued to thrive for years despite frequent warnings from law enforcement agencies encouraging consumers to exercise caution when purchasing event tickets.

Appealing to music and sports fans ahead of the busy summer period, during which many concerts and sporting events are scheduled to take place, Britain’s national fraud reporting centre Action Fraud this week launched an awareness-raising campaign designed to encourage members of the public to only buy event tickets from authorised sellers. The organisation revealed that it had received 4,755 reports of ticket fraud in the 13 months to the end of April this year, noting that victims across the UK lost £1,654,888 ($2.08 million) to scammers over that period. This works out to an average of £365 per victim. Data recorded by Action fraud suggested that ticket fraud activity appears to peak over the summer months, with the agency observing a rise in the number of cases in August last year. Over in the US, a poll conducted by ticketing technology maker Aventus revealed last September that around 12% of Americans said they had bought a concert ticket online that later turned out to be fake. Some two-thirds of respondents said they worried they might get scammed when purchasing concert tickets on the internet.

The ticket resale market has become a huge business over recent decades, with companies such as StubHub and Viagogo raking in billions of dollars a year by providing a marketplace on which users can trade event tickets and passes. This has proven to be a massive boon to touts, who use bots to buy up large numbers of tickets to popular events before selling them on for a massive mark up. While these sites still suffer from problems related to the sale of counterfeit or unauthorised tickets, they have taken steps to address the issue, with some offering refunds to users who do get scammed. But while measures such as these might result in buyers getting their cash back if they are unfortunate enough to buy fake tickets, they cannot prevent fans being left disappointed and out of pocket if they travel to an event venue before realising the tickets they have are unusable. In May, football enthusiasts were warned that tickets sold on reseller sites for the Champions League final in Madrid, Spain, were unauthorised, and could leave many who had bought them unable to watch the game.

Away from online reseller outlets, fraudsters often set up their own fake ticket websites. Buyers who use these can expect to be sent counterfeit tickets, not be sent any tickets at all, or be told to meet a representative from the seller at the venue on the day of the event to collect their passes, only to find that nobody turns up. Earlier this month, a man from Illinois in the US told reporters how he had paid $433 for tickets to see former Beatle Paul McCartney, only to be turned away from the venue after his tickets were found to be bogus. In instances such as these, consumers often struggle to get their money back, unless they are able to take advantage of protection offered by their card provider.

It is perhaps most risky to buy event tickets from vendors on social media, auction sites or fan forums. But while many people realise this to be the case, sports and music fans can sometimes be so desperate to get their hands on the tickets they want that they are willing to take the risk. A poll conducted by UK bank Barclays in April of this year revealed that 40% of millennials in Britain would use social media to buy event tickets from private vendors, despite being aware that doing so is high risk. The survey found that 37% of millennial festival-goers said they had fallen victim to three or more ticketing scams, highlighting how easy it is for fraudsters to target this demographic. Scammers are also able to take advantage of social media by skimming information from images of event tickets that people post online. The organisers of the Glastonbury Festival in the UK this year warned buyers not to upload pictures of their tickets to social media platforms over fears that fraudsters could use barcodes and other information to create cloned passes.

No matter what measures are put in place by reseller websites or other platforms on which counterfeit event tickets are sold, the fact that sports and music fans are willing to go to such great lengths to see their heroes in the flesh makes it unlikely that the fraudsters will be going out of business anytime soon. The only real way to tackle the problem is to outlaw the secondary ticketing market altogether, but to do so would result in the destruction of a multi-billion dollar worldwide business, as well as the disappearance of a marketplace that works perfectly well for many people, even if it does allow morally-questionable touts to take advantage of people’s passion for the arts and sport. But without such a ban, people will continue to be conned by fake ticket vendors, regardless of how many campaigns are launched to raise awareness of the issue.

Continue Reading

Newsletter

Sign up for our mailing list to receive updates and information on events

Social Widget

Latest articles

Press review

Follow us on Twitter

Trending

Shares