Rosenberg et al v. Lashkar-E-Taiba et al

Filing 16

AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION in Opposition re 12 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Declaration of James Kreindler filed by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 2 Exhibit B to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 3 Exhibit C to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 4 Exhibit D to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 5 Exhibit E to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 6 Exhibit F to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 7 Exhibit G to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 8 Exhibit H to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 9 Exhibit I to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 10 Exhibit J to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 11 Exhibit K to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 12 Exhibit L to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 13 Exhibit M to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 14 Exhibit N to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 15 Exhibit O to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 16 Exhibit P to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 17 Exhibit Q to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 18 Exhibit R to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 19 Exhibit S to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 20 Exhibit T to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 21 Exhibit U to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 22 Exhibit V to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 23 Exhibit W to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 24 Exhibit X to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 25 Exhibit Y to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 26 Exhibit Z to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 27 Exhibit AA to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 28 Exhibit BB to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 29 Exhibit CC to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 30 Exhibit DD to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 31 Exhibit EE to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 32 Exhibit FF to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 33 Exhibit GG to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 34 Exhibit HH to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 35 Exhibit II to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 36 Exhibit JJ to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 37 Exhibit KK to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 38 Exhibit LL to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 39 Exhibit MM to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 40 Exhibit NN to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 41 Exhibit OO to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 42 Exhibit PP to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 43 Exhibit QQ to the Declaration of James Kreindler, # 44 Exhibit RR to the Declaration of James Kreindler) (Walsh, Kevin)

Search
●

Home

●

Parliamentary business

●

MPs, Lords & offices

●

About Parliament

●

Get involved

●

Visiting

●

Education

●

House of Commons

●

House of Lords

●

What's on

●

Bills & legislation

●

Committees

●

Publications & records

●

Parliament TV

●

News

●

Topics
You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons
Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Debate

Previous Section

Index

Retail Crime
9. Barbara Follett (Stevenage): What representations his Department has received from the British Retail
Consortium about tackling crime against retailers. [57055]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Bob Ainsworth): We appreciate
the input that the British Retail Consortium makes to tackling retail crime. We have received a number of
representations from the consortium in the past year and we are in regular touch with it at both ministerial and
official level.
My hon. Friend does a lot of work for and on behalf of the consortium, so she will know that the Home Office is
providing £170 million for closed circuit television initiatives, £50 million for communities against drugs and £15 million
in grants to retailers in deprived areas to enhance security. Other measures will inform retailers of how better to
protect themselves against crime.

Home Page

Barbara Follett: I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and for all the work that he is doing on behalf of retailers.
However, given the importance of the reduction of retail crime in Government programmes for social cohesion and
urban regeneration, why is the reduction in retail crime not yet one of the official police force performance indicators?
Mr. Ainsworth: I think that my hon. Friend knows that, after consultation with the Association of Chief Police Officers
and the Association of Police Authorities, we cut the number of performance indicators. We would be loth to add to them.
I think that she also appreciates that there is a problem of under-reporting of crime in this sector, and that
might undermine the value of a performance indicator. However, she is right about the importance of tackling retail
crime and about its connection with social exclusion and community cohesion. I assure her that we will continue to
work with the consortium to bear down on the problem.
Mr. Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster): My constituency contains the west end of London, one of
the largest retail areas in the UK. Retailers to whom I have spoken and Westminster city council have welcomed the idea
of working in partnership with the police force so that street wardens ensure that, as far as possible, retail crime is kept
to an absolute minimum. Will the Minister be looking to drive that initiative forward not only in the centre of London but
in other centres that are important in terms of their retail excellence?
Mr. Ainsworth: We have found a Conservative in favour of street wardens, and I am quite surprised by that. We
are looking at all kinds of issues and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be able to support those covered by the
Police Reform Bill. We are also constantly talking to the British Retail Consortium about specific issues and are
keeping them under review to see how we can help.
10 Jun 2002 : Column 593
However, there is much that retailers can do themselves, so responsibility for bearing down on retail crime does not lie
all on the Government's side.

Neighbourhood Wardens
10. Martin Linton (Battersea): What plans he has to give neighbourhood wardens powers to demand names
and addresses and detain suspects. [57056]
The Minister for Policing, Crime Reduction and Community Safety (Mr. John Denham): Members of street
warden schemes, such as the one being set up in Wandsworth, are already able to be given local authority
enforcement powers. Subject to the wish of Parliament, we intend that the Police Reform Bill will enable limited
police powers, including the right to require a name and address in respect of certain offences, to be extended to
wardens and others who are part of community safety accreditation schemes.
Martin Linton: May I tell my right hon. Friend how much I welcome the fact that neighbourhood wardens started
working in Clapham Junction last month? When I spoke to them on their first day at work, they said that they
could certainly do with the additional powers proposed for community safety officers. If neighbourhood wardens catch a
fly tipper red-handed and the alleged offender refuses to give a name or gives a false name, there is very little that
they can do at the moment. If they witness an arrestable offence, they have to rely on the powers of citizens arrest.
Would it not be better for all concerned if neighbourhood wardens had the same powers as community safety officers?
Mr. Denham: I understand my hon. Friend's point. Although the important power to detain with reasonable
10 Jun 2002 : Column 594
force that we have proposed for CSOs has currently been removed from the Police Reform Bill by the other place, it is
the Government's judgment that that power should be exercised only by someone who is directly an employee of the
police service rather than by someone who is an employee of a local authority. If local authorities wish to work
in partnership in, for example, London with the Metropolitan police, it is open to them to provide funding for the CSOs
who would be directly deployed in their local government area. I believe that the important power to detain with
reasonable force should be exercised by and under the auspices of the police service, but I welcome my hon.
Friend's positive comments about the impact of street wardens. They perform an important role in its own right.
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton): There is a further problem concerning the identity of suspects.

Last week, in Exeter court, there was a case involving a paedophile who had served a custodial sentence, then, on
the expiry of his licence period, changed his name by deed poll and reoffended. That caused huge problems to the police
in identifying him as a suspect for the second crime that he committed. Will the Minister ensure that that loophole is
closed, so that paedophiles who have served sentences cannot change their names by deed poll?
Mr. Denham: The hon. Lady raises a very important matter. I have not read the details of the case, but it is
not immediately obvious why fingerprinting and other evidence would not have identified the individual. It is essential
that something as simple as a deed poll change of name should not be used to evade the proper powers of the law or of
the police. If the hon. Lady would like to give me the details of the case, I shall look into it as a matter of urgency.
10 Jun 2002 : Column 595

India/Pakistan

3.31 pm
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Jack Straw): With permission, Mr. Speaker,
I wish to make a statement about the situation in India and Pakistan.
Intense diplomatic efforts and decisions made in recent days by the Governments of India and Pakistan give grounds
for some optimism, and tensions have eased a little. None the less, with 1 million men under arms on either side of the
line of control in a high state of readiness, the risks of a conflict remain significant. As both countries are in possession
of nuclear weapons, the potential consequences for the region and for the wider world are devastating.
Let me give some brief background, then set out the action that has been taken by Her Majesty's Government,
working particularly with the Government of the United States.
The territory of Kashmir has been the subject of dispute since independence in 1947. Three major wars have been
fought between India and Pakistanin 1948 to 1949, 1965 and 1971and in 1999 there was a particularly bloody battle
in Kargil on the Indian side of the line of control. The people of Kashmir have been caught in the middle of that, at a cost
of tens of thousands of lives and even more people displaced. There has long been serious concern in the
international community about the human rights deficit in Jammu and Kashmir and about the conduct of some
elections there.
During the last decade or so, the character of the conflict has changed as a result of the incursion of armed militants
across the line of control into India from the Pakistani side. A number of terrorist organisationsincluding Laskhar-eToiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harakat Mujahideen, each of which I proscribed when I was Home Secretaryhave been
at the forefront of violent activity in the region. India has long charged that such terrorism has had the covert support
of successive Pakistani Governments and, in particular, of the main intelligence agency in Pakistan, the InterServices Intelligence DirectorateISID. Her Majesty's Government accept that there is a clear link between the ISID
and those groups.
Towards the end of last year, India suffered two serious terrorist outrages. On 1 October, more than 40 people died in
an assault on the state assembly in Srinagar, the capital of Jammu and Kashmir. On 13 December, the Indian
Parliament building in New Delhi was attacked, leaving 14 people dead. In response to intensive diplomatic
pressure, including the visit to the region by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, President Musharraf delivered
a speech on 12 January in which he pledged:

"No organisation will be allowed to indulge in terrorism in the name of Kashmir".
From early May, when the heavy winter snows began to melt, there was nevertheless an increase in terrorist activity
in Jammu and Kashmir and a rise in levels of infiltration across the line of control. That renewed violence included an
attack on 14 May on a passenger bus and residential quarters of the Indian army base at Kaluchak, killing 34
people, mainly women and children. A week later, the prominent moderate Kashmiri politician, Abdul Ghani Lone,

was assassinated.
10 Jun 2002 : Column 596
The dispute between India and Pakistan is at root a bilateral matter which can only be resolved by direct dialogue
between the parties. But it is a dispute with potent international implications, both because of the potential scale of
any military action, including the possible use of nuclear weapons, and because, post-11 September, new imperatives
have been imposed on all member states by United Nations Security Council resolution 1373 to take effective action
to counter terrorism.
Since last autumn and particularly since the resurgence of violence in recent weeks, the conflict has been high on
the international community's agenda. There has been intensive diplomatic activity from the United States and the
United Kingdom Governments, Russia, China, other European Union and G8 countries and, of course, from countries in
the region. As part of this co-ordinated diplomatic effort, I visited Pakistan and India on 28 and 29 May. I had discussions
in Pakistan with President Musharraf and Foreign Minister Sattar, and in India with Prime Minister Vajpayee, External
Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh, Home Minister Advani, Defence Minister George Fernandes and the Leader of the
Opposition, Sonia Gandhi.
In Islamabad, I underlined to President Musharraf the need for Pakistan to take visible, decisive and verifiable steps to
seal the line of control; to stop supplies to militant groups; to help restrain the violent activities of those groups; and
to close the militant training camps on Pakistan's side of the line of control.
In my meetings in Delhi with Prime Minster Vajpayee and Jaswant Singh, I stressed that as Pakistan had demonstrated
that it was taking the necessary steps to clamp down on terrorism, India should respond positively. A number of
possible steps to reduce tension were discussed with both sides. I also underlined to the Indian Government once again
the need for them to take steps to improve the human rights situation in Jammu and Kashmir and to ensure free, fair
and inclusive elections in Jammu and Kashmir this autumn.
Before my visit, Commissioner Patten of the EU visited the region and held discussions with both sides. Last week at
a regional conference in Almaty, both Russian President Putin and Chinese President Jiang Zemin met separately
with President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has spoken at length to
both sides, and to Presidents Bush and Putin, about the situation.
Following my trip, US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage visited both countries last week. Mr. Armitage was
given a categorical undertaking by President Musharraf that sealing the line of control would be "permanent".
The Government of India described that as a "step forward" and said that they would respond "appropriately
and positively." Separately, the US and UK Governments have assessed that there appears to have been a
significant reduction in incursions across the line of control since towards the end of May.
I am pleased to tell the House that when I spoke this morning to my Indian counterpart, Jaswant Singh, he told me
that India was announcing today that restrictions on overflights from Pakistan over India were to be lifted, and that
the name of the next Indian high commissioner to Pakistan was being made public. I also understand that the western
and eastern Indian fleets are returning to port.
10 Jun 2002 : Column 597
We have, therefore, seen both sides take first steps in the right direction, but the position is still precarious. Terrorism
is still a threat and the situation will continue for some time to require the engagement of the international community.
Like my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and President Putin, President Bush has made it clear that he intends to
remain personally involved. I should like to express my thanks and appreciation to US Secretary of State Colin Powell
and his deputy Richard Armitage for their indefatigable work in trying to help to resolve the crisis.
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will be visiting India and Pakistan this week. The international efforts
against terrorism and the Kashmir crisis will be an important agenda item for the meeting of G8 Foreign Ministers
in Whistler, western Canada, which I shall be attending later this week. Fellow EU Foreign Ministers are discussing
the matter today.
The present crisis has, of course, had direct consequences for many UK citizens and their families. The UK has up to
3 million citizens who are of south Asian origin. As Secretary of State, I have to balance our wider foreign policy
interests with my direct duty of care for all UK citizens in the region and for all British Government staff and their
families, whether UK based or locally engaged. In response to specific terrorists threats, I decided on 22 May to reduce

the level of staffing at British Government posts in Pakistan. At the same time, our travel advice was amended to
advise against all but essential travel to Pakistan. As the House was about to rise, there was no opportunity for me to
make a statement. I wrote to all colleagues in this House and the other place to set out the changes that had been
made and set out in a separate letter what we are seeking to do on the issue of Kashmir.
As tensions increased between the two countries, I announced during the recess, on 31 May, a drawdown of less
essential British staff and their families from all posts in Pakistan and from New Delhi and Mumbai in India, and also
issued new travel advice for India. Last Wednesday, 5 June, I announced further strengthening of our travel advice
in respect of both countries.
We have been working hard to keep the south Asian communities here properly informed of what we are doing and
to understand and respond to their anxieties. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary therefore met representatives
of those communities on 29 May to listen to their concerns. As soon as I returned from the sub-continent on 30 May, I
held similar meetings, including some with a number of colleagues from this House, to explain what I had been doing
in New Delhi and Islamabad.
As every hon. Member knows, our high commissions in New Delhi and Islamabad are among the busiest visa and
consular operations in the world. Throughout this difficult period, we have maintained a service in India, albeit at a
reduced level. Visa and consular operations in Pakistan had to be temporarily suspended, but I am pleased to tell the
House that a limited service resumed last Thursday, 6 June.
Notwithstanding the more hopeful signs, the situation in the region remains dangerous. The problems between India
and Pakistan cannot satisfactorily be resolved by military means. That would only lead to more suffering
10 Jun 2002 : Column 598
and potentially have devastating consequences for everyone. Working with our international partners, particularly
the United States, our diplomatic efforts are there to encourage both sides to take the necessary steps to end
terrorism, reduce tensions and enter into effective dialogue. Only then can we hope to break the cycle of crises and
secure a permanent peaceful settlement to the issue of Kashmir.

Next Section

●

A-Z index
Glossary
●
Contact us
●
Freedom of Information
●
Jobs
●
Using this website
●
Copyright
●

Index

Home Page