Inmate on Hunger Strike at HMP Manchester

SOURCE : Helptheprisoners.org
21st February 2009

Rengzeib Ahmed is currently on Hunger Strike within HMP Manchester, having been subjected to a series of intimidatory actions by the prison staff. He is currently serving a life sentence in relation to acts alleged under the POTA 2000. He alleges that the Greater Manchester Police together with domestic security services in collusion with Pakistani investigators were responsible for his torture, including Beaten with Sticks, whipped with electric cables, subjected to sleep deprivation, sexually humiliated and had his nails removed with pliers. To date, though the police deny the allegations they have provided no explanation for the injuries that he has suffered whilst in Pakistani custody.

Whilst serving his sentence at HMP Manchester, he has continued to suffer abuses whilst in custody. He alleges that these have included threats by inmates and staff to such extent that he fears for his safety. The latest incident has been HMP Manchester attempting to force Rengzeib to share a cell with an unknown inmate despite being a Category A prisoner which surely raises security concerns. Rengzeib is concerned that this is an attempt to physically harm him, as the Prison service has been found to be indirectly culpable in the past via the Zahed Mubarak Enquiry. Rengzeib has been concerned to such an extent that he has engaged in a hunger strike within the segregation unit, which is now on its fifth day.

According to Prison Service Instructions, the only situation that a Category A prisoner would be expected to share with another inmate would be owing to a risk of suicide where the other prisoner would be there for support. This is stated as such :-

“Potential Category As must generally be held in single cells. However, an Operational Manager, on the advice of the medical officer, may authorise cell sharing if the prisoner has been assessed as at risk of suicide or self-harm. Care should be taken in selecting any other prisoner as a cellmate, having particular regard to the offence with which the potential Category A has been charged.”

- PSI 2005/38

After a number of incidents at HMP Manchester involving muslim inmates, including mail being lost / undelivered, threats made to muslim inmates, denial of religious right to practice, and many other incidents, it is our fear that this is an attempt by the prison service at HMP Manchester to engage in “Gladiator” style fights between muslim and non-muslim inmates and escalate the already precarious tensions present.

We call upon the prison staff at HMP Manchester to cease their harassment of not only Rengzeib, but all inmates, to protect their safety and to allow all their rights entitled to them under the law.

Actions required

Write to the Governor of HMP Manchester to complain about the treatment given to Rengzeib and others

Write to the Prison service and prison ombudsman to demand an enquiry into Officers conduct at the Prison

Write to your MP to highlight the issues that Rengzeib and others are facing

Key Contacts

Richard Vince, Governor
HMP Manchester
1 Southall Street
Manchester
M60 9AH

T: 0161 817 5600
F: 0161 817 5601

Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
United Kingdom

general.queries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Anne Owers, Prison Inspectorate
Ashley House
2 Monck Street
London
SW1P 2BQ

Tel 020 7035 2876
Fax 020 7035 2860
Email: mail@ppo.gsi.gov.uk

Sample Letter

Dear ,

I am writing to you in relation to an Inmate at HMP Manchester, Rengzeib Ahmed, whom I understand is currently on hunger strike owing to the ill treatment that he is receiving.

Whilst serving his sentence at HMP Manchester, he has continued to suffer abuses whilst in custody. He alleges that these have included threats by inmates and staff to such extent that he fears for his safety. The latest incident has been HMP Manchester attempting to force Rengzeib to share a cell with an unknown inmate. Rengzeib is concerned that this is an attempt to physically harm him, as the Prison service has been found to be indirectly culpable in the past in previous enquiries such as that of Zahed Mubarak.

According to Prison Service Instructions, the only situation that a Category A prisoner would be expected to share with another inmate would be owing to a risk of suicide where the other prisoner would be there for support. This is stated as such :-

“Potential Category As must generally be held in single cells. However, an Operational Manager, on the advice of the medical officer, may authorise cell sharing if the prisoner has been assessed as at risk of suicide or self-harm. Care should be taken in selecting any other prisoner as a cellmate, having particular regard to the offence with which the potential Category A has been charged.”

- PSI 2005/38

I am extremely disappointed that the situation and tensions between muslim inmates and staff continue to escalate, and I find it concerning that for a prison that previously experienced an extremely serious disturbance of the Strangeways Riots that it does not see the need to address underlying concerns of inmates, particularly those of an ethnic minority background. Every prisoner regardless of their convictions should have the right to serve their sentence fairly and without prejudice.

I would urge you to please investigate the issues I have raised in this letter in order to ensure that all prisoners rights are protected and no inmates are suffering discriminatory treatment, as per HMP Manchesters obligations under the law.

Regards,

Note To Supporters : Please distribute widely, and we ask all supporters to post the message in full and to attribute the source.

Cageprisoners: Clarification on Counter-Terrorism Collaboration

A clarification by NGO Cageprisoners, on the role of Muslim leadership in collaborating with the security services and police in counter-terrorism efforts in the UK

Download here

Plunged Into a Nightmare

Alana Smith reports on the case of Fahad Hashmi, a 29-year-old man whose life has been been turned upside down by the “war on terror.”

DURING BARACK Obama’s inauguration speech, it was striking to hear him declare that “we are a nation of Christians and Muslims”–indicating that both have the right to live and practice their religions in America, free from discrimination.

However, for Arabs and Muslims who have faced racism, religious discrimination, and unjustified arrests and detention under the auspices of “fighting terrorism,” the Obama’s administration’s commitment to the “war on terror” would seem to be in contradiction with that idea.

This contradiction is exemplified in cases like Fahad Hashmi.

Hashmi is a 29-year-old Pakistani man who received his bachelor’s degree in political science from Brooklyn College in 2003 and his master’s degree in international relations from London Metropolitan University in 2006.

In 2004, he allowed an acquaintance, Junaid Babar, to stay at his London apartment for two weeks. While there, Babar kept raincoats and waterproof socks in his luggage, which the U.S. alleges he later gave to a high-ranking member of al-Qaeda.

What you can do
The next hearing for Fahad Hashmi will take place on Tuesday, February 17, at 11 a.m. in front of Judge Loretta Preska at 500 Pearl Street in Manhattan.

For more information about the case, including organizing meetings and court dates, visit the Free Fahad Web site, where you can also make a donation, sign a petition, and view the Free Fahad You Tube channel.

Simply because of this–raincoats and socks–Hashmi was arrested by British police at London’s Heathrow Airport on June 6, 2006, and charged with providing material support to al-Qaeda. He was not accused of providing money or resources to al-Qaeda, or personally giving anything at all to any member of al-Qaeda, or o being a terrorist himself. Yet he was held in the general prison population of Belmarsh Prison in England for 11 months, and then extradited to the United States, where he has been held in solitary confinement for over a year.

Fahad has been subject to Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), which are designed to prevent crimes from being planned from within prisons. Although he is not charged with any acts of violence, nor has he been accused of attempting to contact any terrorists while in prison, he has been forced to endure a 23-hour-a-day lockdown; is only allowed one visit from an immediate family member per week, with no physical contact permitted; and is not allowed contact with anyone else other than his lawyer and prison officials.

The SAMs also prohibit Fahad’s family members from passing any messages between him and his friends, restrict what reading material he is permitted to see, and dictate that he may not listen to or watch the news or participate in group prayer.

At a hearing on January 23, a judge heard a motion to improve the conditions of Fahad’s imprisonment by increasing his visitation rights to two hours per week, allowing him to participate in communal prayer, and granting him access to exercise and recreation facilities.

Negotiations about visitation rights are ongoing, but the other requests were denied since the court had already ruled that the government’s “security concerns” were justified, and the SAMs have already been extended for a second year.

During this hearing, the prosecution claimed that Fahad was practicing shadow-boxing and martial arts in his cell, and that, when asked by a guard what he was doing, Fahad replied, “Practicing for you.” Prosecutors said that when he was asked to stop, he refused. This example was used to demonstrate that Fahad is, in fact, a “security risk.”

However, Fahad says that he was never told to stop, and that he didn’t say that he was practicing to attack the guards–but instead, that the guards taunted him by asking if he was practicing for them. There are videotapes of this incident that could easily be used to clarify what really happened, but the tapes are not being made available to the court.

Around 40 supporters attended Fahad’s latest hearing, including members of the Brooklyn College Islamic Society, the Muslim Justice Initiative/Free Fahad Campaign, Fahad’s family and friends, and political activists.

Given the court’s intransigence in spite of the weak evidence against Fahad and strong support for him, it is clear that we must raise the profile of this case and amplify our outrage. Even while we celebrate victories like the closing of the U.S. prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, it is crucial that we fight the domestic repercussions of the “war on terror,” which are still ongoing.

Taking a stand against the profiling of Arabs and Muslims is more urgent than ever, and justice for Fahad Hashmi is a fight we should be able to win.

Doug Singsen contributed to this article.

http://socialistworker.org/2009/02/02/plun…nto-a-nightmare