SHOCK AS CHARGES AGAINST SHOUKRI DROPPED
06/09/06 09:06 EST
The case against Ihab Shoukri, who was accused of membership of the loyalist paramilitary UDA/UFF, has been thrown out of court. Judge Thomas Burgess at Belfast Crown Court ruled that there was not enough evidence for Shoukri to go to trial.
The 32-year-old, of Westland Drive, north Belfast, was also told that charges of professing membership of the UDA and UFF had also been dropped.
Lawyers for the Crown told the court they had no plans to appeal against the judge`s ruling.
It had been alleged that he was a member of the UDA and UFF between February and July 2003.
Shoukri had also faced two further charges of professing to be a member of both paramilitary organisations between May 14 and May 20, 2003.
After the brief hearing, Shoukri, who wore a white T-shirt and light blue jeans, shook hands with his legal team before leaving the courtroom with two associates.
Sinn Fein alleged charges against loyalists were dropped because they were being protected by the British state.
North Belfast assembly member Cathy Stanton said many nationalists were puzzled at the fact that cases like this one involving prominent loyalist figures seemed frequently to end up with the prosecution being dropped.
Ms Stanton said: “Time and again loyalists who openly flaunt their membership of unionist paramilitary organisations end up having charges dropped when the case finally reaches court. Many nationalists are puzzled by this and are quite rightly assuming that this occurs time and again because of the close links between the British state and the unionist paramilitary gangs.”
“It seems that the leaders of the loyalist gangs are being protected by the British state,” she said.
SDLP justice spokesman Alban Maginness said he was shocked the charges against Shoukri had been dropped.
The North Belfast MLA said: “This is a very surprising decision and one that will be a huge matter of public concern. It is not unreasonable to assume that there would have been enough evidence readily available to provide the basis for a prosecution.”
“It therefore comes as a great surprise that at this late stage the evidence which the prosecution relied upon is deemed to be unsuitable for proceeding. It is disappointing that this prosecution has not been pursued by the Public Prosecution Service.”
Mr Maginness claimed the decision cast doubt over the commitment of the authorities to pursue the defendant with vigour.
He added: “There will be alarm in the community that this man has now been released and given his past record, there is every reason for people to be deeply concerned.”
