Shoukri case withdrawn and no prosecutions over illegal Dunloy protest

Charges have been withdrawn against Ihab Shoukri and the DPP has decided not to proceed against those involved in an illegal protest in Dunloy.Judge Burgess’s commented that the prosecution;

“may have to consider wider issues than those before the court.”

Chief Inspector Wallace said that;

“…the reasons for not prosecuting were confidential.”

Both comments will raise again the issue of the reasons for prosecutorial inaction being made public.

PS Before everyone starts I am aware in the different nature and seriousness of the charges and not equating them the common thread is the lack of information.

  • m

    FD,

    You did equate them, you put both cases together when you could easily have blogged both.

    The result will be a dilution of debate as both topics cross and/or a direction of the narrative by the blogger onto the one shared element of two very, very different topics.

    Could you not have blogged them separately and noted the similarity of one aspect?

    A cynic could comment you may be trying to dilute the impact of one by linking it to the other.

  • Dec

    DUP Councillor Ian Stevenson…said “If that’s the case then it sends a message that people can get away with that type of protest…One wonders if it had been Orangemen who had engaged in the same type of activity would they have got away with it,” he added.

    I take it Councillor Stevenson was on holiday during last years Whiterock Parade riots? Orangemen got away with a lot more than sit-down protests.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Fair_Deal: “Charges have been withdrawn against Ihab Shoukri and the DPP has decided not to proceed against those involved in an illegal protest in Dunloy.”

    Soooooooo… we contrast membership in an illegal terrorist organization with an act of civil disobedience. Kinda like watching a limbo dancer.

    Fair_Deal: “Both comments will raise again the issue of the reasons for prosecutorial inaction being made public. ”

    Gee, lets see… Republican sit-down protest = act of civil disobedience common to the US Civil Rights era. Shoukri = membership in illegal paramilitary groups and PROCLAIMING membership in said groups.

    Can we say “comparing apples and cinderblocks?”

    Fair_Deal: “PS Before everyone starts I am aware in the different nature and seriousness of the charges and not equating them the common thread is the lack of information. ”

    Please. This is just another iteration of “themmuns are as bad as we’uns.” At no point in the protest story were there cryptic statements in the vein of the following:

    ‘Judge Burgess also said that when deciding on what evidence to put forward, the prosecution “may have to consider wider issues than those before the court”. ‘

    Ergo, there is something afoot in the Shoukri case — “wider issues” to be considered. There may be “wider issues” in the protest, but they are plainly evident in the story — several notable politicians were among the arrested in the act of civil disobedience. This creates a case of little import (objectively) that could have a disproprtionately large impact (politically).

  • English

    Where does Ihab Shoukri or his parents originate from? With a name like that he doesn’t sound like one of the usual sons of William!

  • fair_deal

    English

    Mother from Belfast father from Eqypt.

  • English

    She poisoned his mind then!

  • Belfast Gonzo

    Interesting that the judge banned the Shoukri verdict from being reported yesterday.

  • Simon

    “Judge Burgess said that it had be to remembered the charges were “a snapshot in time which is now historic.””

    2003 seems so far away now.

  • darth rumsfeld

    well actually there is a qualitative difference between the two cases that has not been picked up on. In Shoukri’s case it was the Judge who stopped it going further. In Dunloy the PPS couldn’t be arsed to proceed with the prosecutions. Not for the first time the agenda of some people in that body needs to be questioned

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Darth Rumsfeld: “well actually there is a qualitative difference between the two cases that has not been picked up on. In Shoukri’s case it was the Judge who stopped it going further. In Dunloy the PPS couldn’t be arsed to proceed with the prosecutions. Not for the first time the agenda of some people in that body needs to be questioned ”

    Let us examine this for a moment. In the former case, a Judge stops a prosecution with a cryptic statement regarding “wider issues than those before the court,” reasonably implying that the someone wanted the case quashed, lest some other aspect of matters come to the public’s attention. In the latter case, we have an act of civil disobedience — correct me if I am wrong, but this would be a relatively minor infraction — a civil, not criminal matter, akin to a speeding ticket, yes? Included in the body of persons arrested are several Nationalist politicians, including at least one of note. Presumably, given the minor nature of the infraction and the inordinate amount of attention it might gather, I can understand letting the matter drop, if only to avoid the headache of the subsequent spectacle.

  • Rory

    Perhaps Shoukri promised “not to do it again” and the judge, being a Mario Puzo fan, recognised him as a man of honour whose very word is his bond in the great tradition of Loyalist gang ethics.

  • GAK

    His mother is a Catholic,him and the brother have been playing with fire for a long time now,it’s only a matter of time before they get roasted.

  • Ex-UUP

    civil disobedience = breaking the law
    memberhsip of the UDA = Breakeing the law

    both groups should have the book thrown at them

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Ex-UUP: “both groups should have the book thrown at them”

    I don’t necessarily disagree, although the “book” thrown at the protesters would likely have been little more than a pamphlet.

    The differing circumstances, especially with the two seemingly deliberately botched prosecutions of Whiterock rioters, are what make me feel distrustful.