East London security bosses sentenced for supplying unlicensed officers to Upton Park development

On Thursday 22 November, Martin Makesa (49) of Bettons Park in East London, the sole director of London Guard Security Limited, and Emily Kamau (35) from Stratford and a former company director, were sentenced at Snaresbrook Crown Court. They were found guilty of providing unlicensed security officers which is an offence under the Private Security Industry Act 2001.

Makesa and Kamau received a sentence of three months’ imprisonment (suspended for 18 months) and have been required to do 80 hours’ unpaid work. They were ordered to pay £2,000 each and disqualified from holding company directorships for five years. The pair are also required to pay a victim surcharge of £115 each.

The company, London Guard Security Limited, was ordered to pay £12,134 and now has 12 months to make the payment. This follows on from the prosecution of Makesa and Kamau by the private security industry’s regulator, the Security Industry Authority (SIA). Makesa and Kamau were found guilty on Friday 26 October following a two-week trial. Full costs were awarded by the court to the SIA.

An SIA investigation began because Makesa’s business, London Guard Security Limited, was sub-contracted to provide SIA-licensed security officers by Crystal Security Services Ltd at the redevelopment site of Upton Park, the former home of West Ham United FC. Emily Kamau was a manager of London Guard Security Limited at the time. Crystal Security Services Ltd had a contract with Barratt Homes (London), the developers of the site, to provide security while filming was taking place at the site.

Unlicensed and untrained operatives

Nathan Salmon, the SIA’s criminal investigations manager, commented: “The defendants in this case sought to satisfy a sub-contract by using unlicensed and, ultimately, untrained security operatives. However, this offered little protection to their customer Crystal Security Services Ltd or to the general public. This created uncertainty regarding the suitability of those operators to perform the role, and whether they had previous criminal offences and/or the right to work in the UK. In addition, the defendants sought to frustrate proceedings by making unproven allegations and providing fraudulent material during the trial. These assertions were, quite rightly, rejected by the Jury and the defendants were convicted.”

SIA investigators carried out routine checks twice on 30 August 2016. Upon arrival on the first occasion, several security officers ran from the site. It was strongly suspected that they were unlicensed. On the second visit, several security officers were found to be working on expired licences and using an invalid Licence Dispensation Notice (an SIA licensing mechanism).

A subsequent investigation found that a security officer (employed by London Guard Security Limited) had handed Mr Makesa his expired SIA licences on the understanding that he would be given employment and would be re-licensed by London Guard Security Limited. This did not occur and, instead, this individual’s personal details were used as a cover to deploy a different, unlicensed security officer to the site on multiple occasions.

Regulatory framework in place

His Honour Justice Southern said at court: “Parliament has seen the need to put in place a regulatory framework to ensure that only those who have been properly trained and assessed as competent and suitable are deployed to work as security officers. In committing these offences, you have circumvented those requirements and, in so doing, have fundamentally compromised and undermined the integrity of the regulatory framework and so deprived the public of the protection that it is designed to provide.”

His Honour Justice Southern continued: “These offences are aggravated by the way in which they were carried out in that documentation was falsified to cover up the fact that a systematic and deliberate disregard of these requirements was being pursued by you for personal financial gain. For these reasons, the offences are so serious that only a custodial sentence can be justified. Also, as in committing these offences you employed false representations as to identity and were knowingly concerned with the production of false documentary records.”

Representations were made to the judge as Mr Makesa has recently acquired a legal qualification and that a conviction would curtail his ability to practise law. With this conviction, Mr Makesa will also be unable to hold an SIA licence in the future.

Home Secretary Theresa May introduces Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill

Home Secretary Theresa May has introduced “urgently-needed legislation” which will give the UK some of the toughest powers in the world to tackle the increasing threat from international terrorism.

According to the Home Office, the all-new Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill will bolster the UK’s already considerable armoury of powers to disrupt the ability of people to travel abroad to fight, reduce the risks they pose on their return and combat the underlying ideology that feeds, supports and sanctions terrorism.

The collapse of Syria, the emergence of ISIL and ongoing instability in Iraq present significant dangers not just in the Middle East but also in Britain and across the West. Many of the 500 British citizens who have travelled to Syria and Iraq have joined terrorist organisations alongside foreign fighters from Europe and further afield.

Home Secretary Theresa May MP

The Bill, which will be enacted at the earliest opportunity, will disrupt those intending to travel by:

*Providing the police with a temporary power to seize a passport at the border from individuals of concern

*Creating a Temporary Exclusion Order that will control the return to the UK of a British citizen suspected of involvement in terrorist activity abroad

*Enhancing the UK’s border security by toughening transport security arrangements around passenger data, ‘No fly’ lists and screening measures

Enhancement of existing terrorism prevention and investigation measures

To deal with those returning to or already in the UK, the Government is:

*Enhancing existing terrorism prevention and investigation measures, including the introduction of stronger locational constraints and a power requiring individuals to attend meetings with the authorities as part of their ongoing management

To support those at serious risk of succumbing to radicalisation, the Government is:

*Creating a general duty on a range of bodies to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism

*Putting Channel – the voluntary programme for people at risk of radicalisation – on a statutory basis

To help disrupt the wider activities of these terrorist organisations, the Bill is:

*Enhancing vital investigative powers by requiring communications service providers to retain additional information in order to attribute an Internet Protocol address to a specific individual

*Amending existing law to ensure that UK-based insurance firms cannot reimburse the payment of terrorist ransoms

Use of these powers – which are consistent with all of the UK’s existing international legal obligations – will be subject to stringent safeguards. These include appropriate legal thresholds, judicial oversight of certain measures and a power to create a Privacy and Civil Liberties Board designed to support the work of David Anderson QC, the current Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation.

Removal of terrorism-related material

The Bill will sit alongside the existing range of tools already used extensively to combat the terrorist threat, including powers to withdraw the passports of British citizens, bar foreign nationals from re-entering the UK and strip British citizenship from those who have dual nationality.

The Government is also working with the Internet industry to remove terrorist material hosted in the UK or overseas. Since February 2010, the Counter-Terrorism Internet Referral Unit has taken down more than 65,000 pieces of unlawful terrorist-related content.

Speaking about the new Bill, Home Secretary Theresa May said: “We’re in the middle of a generational struggle against a deadly terrorist ideology. These powers are essential to keep up with the very serious and rapidly changing threats we face. In an open and free society, we can never entirely eliminate the threat from terrorism but we must do everything possible in line with our shared values to reduce the risks posed by our enemies.”

The Home Secretary added: “This Bill includes a considered and targeted set of proposals that will help to keep us safe at a time of very significant danger by ensuring we have the powers we need to defend ourselves.”

Shami Chakrabarti: director of Liberty

Responding to the Home Secretary’s announcement that the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill will oblige Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to retain information linking IP addresses with individual users, Liberty’s director Shami Chakrabarti commented: “There’s no problem with the targeted investigation of terrorist suspects, including where required the linking of apparently anonymous communications to a particular person. However, every Government proposal of the last so many years has been about blanket sur‎veillance of the entire population. The Snowden revelations demonstrate that they were even prepared to act outside the law and without Parliamentary consent. Forgive us if we look for the devil in the detail of this new Bill.”

Big Brother Watch director Emma Carr added: “There are key issues to be addressed with these IP-based proposals. For example, there are questions over whether or not this will be technically feasible. Proper safeguards must be introduced to ensure that these techniques are used transparently, that there’s a proper level of authorisation and that the oversight and redress mechanisms can function effectively. Also, if such a measure is introduced, time should then be allowed to ensure that its effectiveness in relation to law enforcement investigations can be evaluated with due care and transparency.”

Disruption of terrorist attacks

The National Policing Lead for Counter-Terrorism is Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley of the Metropolitan Police Service. As far as he’s concerned, countering terrorism has for too long been thought of as the sole preserve of the police service, the security agencies and the Government.

Rowley is calling for people and businesses to be prepared to play their part in keeping the country safe. He said: “The danger posed by violent extremists has evolved. They are no longer a problem solely stemming from countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, far away in the minds of the public. Now, they are home-grown in our communities, radicalised by images and messages they read on social media and prepared to kill for their cause. The tragic murder of Lee Rigby last year was a stark warning to us all about how real and local the threat really is.”

Rowley continued: “Police officers and our partners are continuing to work 24 hours a day, seven days a week to protect the UK from a terrorist attack. So far this year we’ve disrupted several attack plots and made 271 arrests following counter-terrorism investigations, but the eyes and ears of law enforcement and other agencies alone cannot combat the threat.”

The UK’s counter-terrorism strategy CONTEST focuses on four key areas: Pursue, Prevent, Protect and Prepare. Most of the publicity around terrorism is based on Pursue and Prevent, as these involve arrests, the disrupting of actual attack plots and turning people away from extremism.

AC Rowley is keen to stress that everyone can be doing more to Protect and Prepare, ensuring security in crowded places, the monitoring of our borders and being ready to respond to a terrorist attack.

“We don’t want to scare people, but we do want them to understand the threat and be vigilant to things that are out of place or suspicious and report it to the police. We need businesses to check that their security measures are effective and train their staff to detect potential threats and, if necessary, respond to an attack.”

Metropolitan Police Service Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley

AC Rowley also stated: “Experience shows us that terrorists target busy, well-populated places to ensure that attacks have a maximum impact. Businesses, particularly those in crowded places, have an invaluable role to play in our fight against terrorists, violent extremists and other criminals. Their staff are often the first people to spot signs that something is wrong.”

The police regularly hold security events with businesses, and the Metropolitan Police Service alone gave 29 presentations during 2013 and 2014.

Since the UK terror threat level increased on 29 August, reports of suspicious behaviour have nearly doubled. This is a direct result of reporting by members of the public, and every one of those reports is investigated.

However, AC Rowley wants more members of the public to have confidence in reporting their suspicions. “Please tell us if you know or suspect something,” he urged. “Your information could save lives. We will deal carefully with all of the information passed to us and respond sensitively and proportionately.”

*The Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill is the seventh major counter-terrorism law introduced in Britain since 9/11. The Bill can be accessed here

‘Grave terrorist threat needs urgent solutions’ states UK Home Affairs Select Committee

In its latest report on counter-terrorism, the UK Home Affairs Select Committee has made a series of strong statements urging the Government to take immediate action.

Focusing on foreign fighters, the Committee states that the Government’s response must encompass dissuading and preventing those who wish to go to fight from going, helping countries who are key to intercepting those entering Syria and ensuring those who return do not present a danger to the UK.

There should be engagement with communities through peer-led schemes to prevent radicalisation, such as the Abdullah X programme.

The Committee recommends that the Government implements a programme (similar to Channel) for everyone returning to Britain where there is evidence that they have fought in Syria.

UK response to the terrorist threat

There should be increased oversight of the vital power to withdraw passports, and the Committee also suggests that the power to make individuals stateless ought not to be employed while the individual is in the UK.

The responsibility for counter-terrorism policing should be moved from the Metropolitan Police Service to the National Crime Agency.

Keith Vaz MP: chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee

All police forces should ensure that local shopping centres have received the British Council of Shopping Centres guidance and put in place and tested a Response Plan.

Oversight of the security and intelligence agencies

The Committee raises concern over the weak nature of the oversight system which has an impact upon the credibility of the agencies accountability, and to the credibility of Parliament itself.

The Commissioners who scrutinise the intelligence services should be full time and properly resourced.
The scrutiny of the work of the security and intelligence agencies should be not the exclusive preserve of the Intelligence and Security Committee.

The Commons membership of the Intelligence and Security Committee should be elected.

The chairman, who should always be a member of the Commons, ought to be subject to election of the whole House and should always be a member of the largest opposition party.

International emergency terrorist platform and capacity building

The UK should lead in the establishment of an international terrorism platform, using existing resources and knowledge at Interpol, which will allow nations access to advice, intelligence and expertise in dealing with terrorist threats.

Overseas Development Aid money could be used to increase resource for capacity building abroad.

Speaking about the Home Affairs Select Committee’s report, the Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (the Committee’s chairman) stated: “Recent events involving Boko Haram, Al-Shabab and Al Qaeda show that the terrorist threat to the UK is as grave as at any point in the past thirteen years. The international community must act as one to tackle this global problem. Interpol has the resources and experience to build a platform and the UK must take the lead in bringing others to the table. However, ensuring public safety cannot be the sole purview of the counter-terrorism command and the security service. It is a responsibility in which all UK citizens and companies take a share.”

Vaz continued: “Stopping British men and women going to become foreign fighters, in Syria and other theatres of conflict, and engaging with them when they return is vital to avoid endangering the security of the UK for many years to come. Whether in classrooms, local community centres or through the global reach of the Internet and social media, a clear message needs to be sent to those at risk. Fighting in Syria is not the answer and without the Government helping peer-led projects to tackle this problem many more may be lost to radicalisation.”

Continuing this them, the MP added: “The current system of oversight is designed to scrutinise the work of George Smiley, not the 21st Century reality of the security and intelligence services. The agencies are at the cutting edge of sophistication and are owed an equally refined system of democratic scrutiny. It is an embarrassing indictment of our system that some in the media felt compelled to publish leaked information to ensure that matters were heard in Parliament.”

In conclusion, Vaz said: “The Intelligence and Security Committee should be given a democratic mandate in the same way as other Select Committees. We will then be able to robustly defend our methods of scrutiny and better serve those who protect us and the public.”