Judge admits that terror legislation imposes restriction on personal freedom

Samina Malik, the self described “lyrical terrorist” has received a nine-month suspended sentence at the Old Bailey, after being found guilty under the Terrorism Act 2000 of possessing material likely to be of use to a terrorist.

Malik, who wrote poems in which she described the beheading of infidels, had downloaded material including al Qaida calls for jihad, weapons manuals, and US military guides to terrorism.

In his sentencing, Judge Peter Beaumont, the Recorder of London, said: “The Terrorism Act and the restriction it imposes on personal freedom exists to protect this country…

“Its protections embrace us all … its restrictions apply to us all, regardless of political or religious conviction.”

Beaumont said he considered Malik’s offence “on the margin” of the crimes defined under the Terrorism Act, and said he had taken into account that Malik was of previous good character, and from a law-abiding family.

Henderson Mullin of Index on Censorship said today: “While I do not think that Samina Malik’s actions should be regarded as a crime, the passing of a non-custodial sentence, and the judge’s assessment that her possession of terror manuals was a marginal offence, are a welcome appearance of sense and reason. It is on cases such as this that any defence of freedom of speech must stand firm and we should be mindful that losing freedom of expression is as great a threat to the way we live as that posed by terror.”