Sultana Tafadar KC has an extensive, high profile practice across counter terrorism and national security, criminal justice, human rights, public law and public international law.
A multi-award-winning King’s Counsel, Sultana offers an exceptional blend of dynamic, diverse, and versatile legal expertise.
Sultana advises and acts for individuals, States, NGOs, multinational corporations and other national and international bodies, appearing in courts at all levels. With a proven track record, a formidable skill set, and an unmatched proficiency across various practice areas, her legal services are delivered with precision & excellence.
Sultana holds a number of national and international human rights-related appointments, including Chair of the Bar Standards Board Taskforce on Religion & Belief; and the Advisory Board of Influencing Corridors of Power (ICOP), SOAS, University of London, She is a Council Member for JUSTICE; Member of Legal Expert Advisory Panel for Fair Trials International (LEAP); Special Advisor on Human Rights for the Oxford Initiative for Global Ethics and Human Rights; Member of the Detention Experience Community of Avocat Sans Frontieres (ASF); the Roster for Criminal Justice Sector Experts dealing with Counter-Terrorism, Organisation for Security & Cooperation in Europe. (OSCE) and Founder of Girls Human Rights Hub. She previously worked at the International Secretariat of Amnesty International (AI) in the Africa Program; the Middle East Program; and the International Justice Project of the International Law Program.
Sultana is the Winner of Barrister of the Year, Inspirational Women in Law Awards, 2022; Winner of the Professions Category, Asian Women of Achievement, 2021; HERoes Top 100 Women Future Leaders, 2021; Finalist in BSN Lawyer of the Year (Chambers), UK Legal Diversity Awards, 2021; Finalist in Outstanding Woman in Professional category sponsored by Baker McKenzie, Precious Awards 2021.
Sultana is widely recognised as one of the foremost experts in counter-terrorism, national security, and radicalisation cases. With a portfolio of over 50 high-profile and landmark cases, her unique expertise spans the Criminal Courts, Coronial Courts, Administrative & Family Divisions of the High Court, and the Appellate Courts. She acts and advises in the whole spectrum of cases in this area ranging from criminal cases, cases involving Terrorism Prevention & Investigation Measures (TPIMS), parole board hearings, radicalisation & extremism cases in the family courts, Prevent-related cases, inquests and inquiries, extradition, terrorism financing, and appeals. She is part of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Roster of Criminal Justice Sector Experts dealing with Counter-Terrorism; and sat on the Legal Advisory Panel of the People’s Review of Prevent. Most of her cases give rise to international dimensions and human rights intricacies.
Sultana’s impressive track record of success lies in her robust advocacy and strategic approach to the multifaceted challenges presented by the factual, evidential, legal complexities in these types of cases. Her work delves into cutting-edge law, theological content, extensive digital evidence, highly sensitive ‘secret’ materials, and complex disclosure issues. Some of the high-profile cases she has acted in include:
Appeal against conviction and sentence for preparation of acts of terrorism (Section 5, Terrorism Act 2000) of a phd student who was accused of having built a drone designed to deliver a warhead or chemical weapon for Islamic State. Received a life sentence with a minimum tariff of 20 years imprisonment. Attracted national press.
Appeal against conviction and sentence of six counts of possession of material likely to be useful for purposes of terrorism (Section 58, Terrorism Act 2000). The documents relate to 3D printing of firearms. Attracted national press.
21 counts of breach of notification requirements by a terrorist offender.
Parole Board hearing in relation to terrorism convictions.
Preparation of acts of terrorism (Section 5, Terrorism Act 2006) and possession of items likely to be useful for purposes of terrorism (Section 58, Terrorism Act 2000). Allegations that the Defendant, along with others, took steps to carry out attack/s. The particulars of the offence were that the Defendant had a large arsenal of weapons at his home including firearms; that he had shared extreme right wing material and joined extremist chat forums; that he shared and exchanged information on making molotovs, explosive substances and firearms; that a 3D print gun was made; that a chat group was created and members were recruited to carry out acts of terrorism; and that a location/s and target/s had been identified. The case involved evidence relating to: (i) ‘prepping, survivalism and bushcraft’; (ii) Mindset material; (iii) the conflict between Russia v Ukraine; (iv) extensive hi-tech evidence from the seizure of devices; (v) expert evidence relating to firearms and explosives; (vi) medical evidence; and (vii) evidence relating to undercover police officers and MI5 operative. Attracted national press.
S a young man of good character, who was remanded into custody for over 14 months, was unanimously acquitted of three terrorism charges after 4 hours of jury deliberation, following a 3-week trial at Winchester Crown Court. He had faced three counts of disseminating terrorist publications (Section 2, Terrorism Act 2006) over social media between February and May 2023. The Crown alleged that S had deliberately used social media to encourage acts of terrorism and provide assistance in the commission of acts of terrorism through the dissemination of a terrorist fitness manual, videos of unidentified Muslim fighters in combat glorifying martyrdom and a video of a Muslim foreign fighter calling on others to join with a view of encouraging Muslims to fight. Unanimous acquittal of all counts.
The trial involved in depth examination of several key issues including: (i) Geopolitical and historical issues around the legitimacy of conflicts in Afghanistan (1980s), Bosnia & Chechnya (1990s) and Ukraine (Present); (ii) The history and legitimacy of the mujahideen and Muslim foreign fighters across these conflicts; (iii) Western support in these conflicts/ proxy wars against Russia and the commission of human rights atrocities in these conflicts; (iv) Issues around Islamic law and the rules of jihad regulating the conduct of foreign fighters engaging in combat to protect civilian lives in those conflicts; (v) Cultural and linguistic issues including the use of nasheeds and Quranic verses; the marginalisation of young Muslim men post 9/11; as well as the impact of Islamophobia and surveillance of Muslim communities; (vi) Legal arguments around admissibility evidence and on the definition of a terrorist publication under s2 of the Terrorism Act 2006; (vii) Extensive alleged “mindset” evidence suggesting that SS had been radicalised online by anonymous ISIS and Al-Qaeda supporters through messages, nasheeds, documentaries, voice notes and internet searches; (viii) Reliance on “high tech” evidence to infer “mindset”. The Defence instructed 5 experts to deal with these issues. Attracted national press.
Parole granted for offender convicted of 3 counts of possession of items likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. Released on licence following a successful parole hearing. Cross examination of Prison Offender Manager, ERG+22 report writer, Community Offender Manager. Expert evidence called on rehabilitative work and reintegration. Parole granted.
Written advice on sentence on conviction on two counts of failing to disclose information about acts of terrorism, contrary to sections 38B(1)(a) and (b) of the Terrorism Act 2000 relating to parity of sentence with co-defendants convicted of, amongst other offences, possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely acetone and hydrogen peroxide in circumstances that gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that the possession was of a purpose connected to the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism, contrary to Section 57(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Attracted national press. Defendant received a suspended sentence.
Dissemination of terrorist publications. Defendant was convicted of six counts of possessing material likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism (Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000). The material indicted included six files that were schematics for the making of five 3D printed firearms and one firearm from conventional material. Expert evidence included (i) extensive hi-tech evidence; (ii) expert evidence on links between the extreme far right and the use of 3D printed firearms; (iii) expert evidence on Islamic language, theology and geopolitics. Attracted national press. Conviction and sentence currently under appeal.
Possession of terrorist publications. The Defendant, who had previously served a 12 year sentence for terrorism (from August 2008) was found guilty of one count of Possessing terrorist material, contrary to section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and three offences of Possessing an article for use in fraud, contrary to section 6 of the Fraud Act 2006, following a trial at Leeds Crown Court in November 2024. He was remanded ahead of trial after pleading guilty to two breaches of his Part 4 Terrorist Notification Order, under section 48 and 54(1)(a) of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 in February 2022. During the trial, an interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeal was made, challenging the trial judge’s decision to admit the Defendant’s convictions. The Defendant did not give evidence during his trial. Attracted national press.
Interlocutory Appeal to the Court of Appeal of a ruling on the law and to the admissibility of evidence, namely bad character evidence, pursuant to s.31(3) CPIA 1996 made during a preparatory hearing. The Appellant faced a trial at Leeds Crown Court on a four-count indictment alleging possession of possession of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism contrary to s.58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and three counts of possession of articles for use in the course of or in connection to any fraud contrary to s.6 of the Fraud Act 2006. He had previous conviction/s for terrorism. Attracted national press.
On 14 March 2023, following a three-week trial, MAS was acquitted of 5 counts of possession of documents or records containing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing acts of terrorism, contrary to section 58(1)(b) of the Terrorism Act 2000. He faced a total of eight counts at trial. The three-week trial included detailed argument and examination on the following issues: (i) Extensive expert evidence uncovered flaws and inaccurate representation of hi-tech material seized from computers, (ii) mobile phones, and social media; (iii) Expert evidence on the Arabic language, history, geopolitics and theology; (iv) Extensive expert evidence on Autistic Spectrum Condition and its impact on the Defendant’s behaviour. Attracted national press. Acquittal of 5 counts of terrorism.
KA, a young man of good character who had been remanded in custody for over a year awaiting trial, was acquitted of dissemination of three terrorist publications in May 2020 (Section 2, Terrorism Act 2006), and possession of a machete in circumstances which give rise to a reasonable suspicion that his possession was intended for a purpose connected with the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism (Section 57, Terrorism Act 2000) in October to November 2021. The jury returned unanimous verdicts of Not Guilty on all counts on the indictment in approximately 2 hours of deliberations. The Crown relied extensively on ‘mindset’ material to suggest KA had an ‘extremist’ mindset. This included reliance on videos, audios, nasheeds, social media messages and posts, and internet history, amongst others. The Crown suggested KA had been radicalised through exposure to ISIS, Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and other propaganda material. The Defence instructed technical experts to examine numerous seized devices, and an expert on culture, language, Islamic law, with experience of terrorist materials to assist. Unanimous acquittal of all counts.
The trial included detailed argument and examination on the following issues: (i) Extensive and successful legal arguments on ‘mindset’ material; (ii) The objective parameters of a terrorist publication under s. 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006; (iii) The change in burden and standard of proof in relation to s.57; (iv) Section 8 disclosure applications for evidence that may undermine the crown’s case and/or assist the defence; (v) The admissibility of expert opinion evidence on the subject of what may constitute a terrorist publication; (vi) Engagement of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights during an assessment of what constitutes a terrorist publication, and when assessing mindset material, including unpalatable speech; (vii) Geopolitical issues, including the background to the Syrian conflict and atrocities committed; the legitimacy of the Assad regime; whether specified militia groups in various parts of the world were religious or political in nature; (viii) Cultural and linguistic issues, including to what extent a passive prayer may be framed in the context of encouragement or inducement to commit acts of terrorism, significance of a Shahadah flag, and the use of certain Arabic terminology and their context dependent meaning; (ix) Theological issues, including examination of the belief system of various sects, types of Salafi and other Islamic groups, interpretation of verses of the Quran and Hadith, definition and scope of terms such as ‘khawarij’, and ‘takfir’, and the proper meaning of ‘jihad.’ Attracted national press.
Successful application for reconsideration of a Parole Board decision in relation to terrorism convictions on the basis of irrationality and/or procedural unfairness. Applicant had not been informed of a parole hearing, was not given the opportunity to make representations and/or to challenge any submissions/evidence considered by the Board in opposition to his release. Application granted.
National Security case before the High Court involving the imposition of a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure (TPIM), including subsequent breaches of the measures. Further details of the case cannot be disclosed.
Charged with possession of items likely to be useful for terrorist purposes.
Charged with dissemination of terrorist publications (section 2) and possession of items likely to be useful for purpose of terrorism (section 58). Defended A at the Old Bailey in a complex terrorism case involving allegations of disseminating extremist material online. The prosecution alleged that A, along with a co-defendant, operated a website hosting speeches by a ‘hate’ cleric. The case involved detailed analysis of online activity, expert evidence on radicalisation, and issues of intent, context, and freedom of expression under the Terrorism Act 2006.
Appeal against sentence for offences of preparing acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2006, s. 5. The Appellant had pleaded guilty to a single offence of preparing acts of terrorism and was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a minimum term of 16 years. SB was convicted of two counts of the same offence and was sentenced to custody for life, with a minimum term of 13 years. Both renewed their applications for leave to appeal against their sentences. Attracted national press.
Inquest into the London Bridge/ Fishmonger Hall attack examined the events of the June 2017, where three attackers drove into pedestrians and then stabbed people in Borough Market, killing eight and injuring many more. The inquest concluded that all victims were unlawfully killed and highlighted critical failings in MI5 and police responses. The attackers were shot dead by police. Represented ex-wife of one of the attackers.
Advice on civil claim arising out of unlawful and discriminatory application of counter terrorism Prevent policy.
Defendant charged with conspiracy to murder and engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, namely by carrying out knife attacks in Westminster Bridge. Part of first all-female cell dubbed ‘The Tea Party’. Pleaded guilty to section 5, Terrorism Act 2006, and received a life sentence with a minimum tariff of 16 years. Attracted national press.
Defendant accused of 12 counts of dissemination of terrorist publications and 1 count of possessing a document likely to be useful to a person committing an act of terrorism. Dubbed the ‘WhatsApp Terrorist’, the case involved complex arguments around intent, freedom of expression, and the defendant’s claim that the material was accessed solely for research and curiosity purposes. Most of his sentence was served upon conviction as a result of an electronically monitored qualifying curfew on bail. Attracted national press.
The Appellant was convicted of multiple terrorism offences, including dissemination of terrorist publications under section 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006. The central issues on appeal involved the trial judge’s directions to the jury regarding the definition of a “terrorist publication” and the protection of the defendant’s rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which safeguards freedom of expression. This case underscores the balance courts must maintain between protecting individual rights and ensuring public safety, particularly in the context of counter-terrorism legislation. Attracted national press. Significant case.
Parole granted in a case relating to allegations of extremism and/or terrorism. Involved complex factual and legal issues surrounding breaches of license conditions and subsequent recall. Gave rise to a civil action against the police. Parole granted.
Appeal against convictions and sentence of 5 years and 6 months’ imprisonment for inviting support for a proscribed organisation (ISIS), contrary to s.12(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. It was argued that the Appellant’s statements were protected by freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. The case clarified the legal threshold for “inviting support”. Attracted national press. Landmark Case.
Interlocutory appeal on the legal ingredients of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 as to what amounts to ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation’, in this case, ISIS. It clarified the scope of Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, particularly concerning the balance between freedom of expression and national security. It establishes that individuals can be convicted for inviting support for a terrorist organization even without direct incitement to violence, provided the invitation is made knowingly. The case has been cited in subsequent legal discussions and judgments concerning the limits of lawful expression and the definition of support for proscribed organizations. Attracted national press. Landmark case.
Landmark guideline case on sentences for Section 5 Terrorism Act 2006, preparation for acts of terrorism. The Court of Appeal addressed multiple appeals and an Attorney General’s reference and, in the absence of detailed sentencing guidelines for such offences, provided comprehensive guidance. Represented the Appellant, Ziamani, in the appeal. He was convicted under section 5 for preparing an act of terrorism, specifically plotting to behead a British soldier. He was sentenced to 22 years imprisonment, with a minimum term of 14 years and 8 months, plus a 5 year extended licence. His custodial sentence was reduced on appeal to 19 years. Attracted national press. Sentence reduced. Landmark case.
Landmark case contesting TPIM imposed by the Home Secretary. Involved consideration of highly sensitive national security evidence. SSHD created a new category of ‘in-camera’ evidence and the hearing was almost exclusively held in closed proceedings. Landmark case.
Application in relation to Section 16 appeal of Terrorism Prevention & Investigation Measures and disclosure in a case involving in-camera material.
Seizure of cash under POCA in relation to suspicion of terrorism. Issues relating to illegality of seizure and admissibility of evidence.
Along with ‘hate preacher’ Anjum Choudhury, R was charged with inviting support for ISIS between June 29, 2014, and March 6, 2015. The prosecution presented evidence that both individuals made public statements endorsing ISIS and its self-declared caliphate, without condemning the group’s violent actions. One of the first prosecutions under this provision. Attracted national press. Landmark case.
Defendant accused of preparation of acts of terrorism in planning to go to Syria to join IS and disseminating terrorist publications. It was alleged that he travelled and tried to join ISIS in Syria, having training for battle at a paintballing centre alongside three other men linked to the group. Attracted national press.
Interlocutory appeal of the legal ingredients of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 as to what amounts to ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation ISIL’.
High profile case where Defendant, along with two others, was acquitted of preparing for acts of terrorism, contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006. It was alleged that he, along with the others, planned to go to Syria to fight alongside ISIS. He was arrested with a co-defendant in the back of a lorry in Dover. The case involved the examination of extensive hi-tech material, social media evidence, ‘mindset’ evidence, evidence of ‘association’ and ideology, geopolitics of Syria and Iraq, and surveillance evidence. Attracted national press. Unanimous acquittal.
Extradition of Defendant from Hungary for breach of notification requirements post terrorism convictions. They were deported from Hungary after being found on a train headed for Bucharest, Romania, in November 2015.
Charged with numerous counts of s.5 of the Terrorism Act 2006, preparation for acts of terrorism, amongst others, they were the brothers of the ‘five star jihadi’ who was killed in battle in Syria. The defence challenged the prosecution’s case on the basis of association, circumstantial evidence, and intent. Despite conviction, extensive mitigation was advanced. The Defendant received a sentence of 6 years imprisonment, to serve half in custody. Attracted national press. The judge explicitly declined to impose an extended sentence.
Defendant accused of engaging in terrorism in Somalia. He was charged with 7 counts of fundraising and 4 counts of engaging in conduct in preparation for acts of terrorism. Pleaded guilty. Attracted national press.
Counter-terrorism prosecution for grievous bodily harm against a religious education teacher. Pleaded guilty. Attracted national press.
Landmark case where Defendants were acquitted of conspiracy to cause explosions with intent to endanger life in the 7/7 bombings of the London transport system. The Defendant was acquitted in the retrial of helping the bombers plan the 2005 attacks, following a complex and highly sensitive case involving extensive surveillance evidence, association with the perpetrators, and significant public scrutiny. The defence emphasised the absence of direct involvement, highlighting the distinction between past associations and criminal intent. This landmark case required careful handling of national security issues, historical context, and the rights of the accused in terrorism prosecutions. Attracted national press. Jury hung in first trial; acquittal in retrial (2009).
Successfully defended WA, an 18-year-old accused of plotting to target members of the British National Party in a high-profile terrorism trial at Leeds Crown Court. He was accused of possessing ‘bomb-making manuals’ and chemicals for the purpose of terrorism, to ‘blow up the BNP’, The defendant was acquitted of all three counts of possessing articles for a terrorist purpose, following a jury trial in which the defence challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of online material and intent. The case involved sensitive issues around political expression, adolescent curiosity, and digital evidence. Attracted national press. Unanimously acquitted of all three counts.
Sultana represents individuals and NGOs in a broad range of public law matters, primarily focusing on cases raising questions of civil liberties and human rights, as well as international law and national security matters. Her work includes advise and representation at parole board hearings, extremism & radicalisation cases, Prevent-related cases, inquests and inquiries, and extradition. She is experienced in cases involving closed material procedures. Her domestic practice is complemented by her international human rights practice (see below).
Parole Board hearing in relation to terrorism convictions.
Parole granted for offender convicted of 3 counts of possession of items likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. Released on licence following a successful parole hearing. Cross examination of Prison Offender Manager, ERG+22 report writer, Community Offender Manager. Expert evidence called on rehabilitative work and reintegration. Parole granted.
Successful application for reconsideration of a Parole Board decision in relation to terrorism convictions on the basis of irrationality and/or procedural unfairness. Applicant had not been informed of a parole hearing, was not given the opportunity to make representations and/or to challenge any submissions/evidence considered by the Board in opposition to his release. Application granted.
National Security case before the High Court involving the imposition of a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure (TPIM), including subsequent breaches of the measures. Further details of the case cannot be disclosed.
Inquest into the London Bridge/ Fishmonger Hall attack examined the events of the June 2017, where three attackers drove into pedestrians and then stabbed people in Borough Market, killing eight and injuring many more. The inquest concluded that all victims were unlawfully killed and highlighted critical failings in MI5 and police responses. The attackers were shot dead by police. Represented ex-wife of one of the attackers.
Advice on civil claim arising out of unlawful and discriminatory application of counter terrorism Prevent policy.
The Appellant was convicted of multiple terrorism offences, including dissemination of terrorist publications under section 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006. The central issues on appeal involved the trial judge’s directions to the jury regarding the definition of a “terrorist publication” and the protection of the defendant’s rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which safeguards freedom of expression. Attracted national press. Significant case.
Parole granted in a case relating to allegations of extremism and/or terrorism. Involved complex factual and legal issues surrounding breaches of license conditions and subsequent recall. Gave rise to a civil action against the police. Parole granted.
High Court Proceedings, Family Division involving allegations of extremism. Consideration of evidence related to acquittal of terrorism allegations in criminal proceedings; evidence of ‘associations’ and other conduct; and evidence related to radicalisation. Unusually, secret evidence was heard in this case. No findings of extremism were made.
Appeal against convictions and sentence of 5 years and 6 months’ imprisonment for inviting support for a proscribed organisation (ISIS), contrary to s.12(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. It was argued that the Appellant’s statements were protected by freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. The case clarified the legal threshold for “inviting support”. Attracted national press. Landmark Case.
1970 Landmark case contesting TPIM imposed by the Home Secretary. Involved consideration of highly sensitive national security evidence. SSHD created a new category of ‘in-camera’ evidence and the hearing was almost exclusively held in closed proceedings. Landmark case.
Application in relation to Section 16 appeal of Terrorism Prevention & Investigation Measures and disclosure in a case involving in-camera material.
Seizure of cash under POCA in relation to suspicion of terrorism. Issues relating to illegality of seizure and admissibility of evidence.
Interlocutory appeal on the legal ingredients of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 as to what amounts to ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation’, in this case, ISIS. It clarified the scope of Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, particularly concerning the balance between freedom of expression and national security. It establishes that individuals can be convicted for inviting support for a terrorist organization even without direct incitement to violence, provided the invitation is made knowingly. The case has been cited in subsequent legal discussions and judgments concerning the limits of lawful expression and the definition of support for proscribed organizations. Attracted national press. Landmark case.
Extradition of Defendant from Hungary for breach of notification requirements post terrorism convictions. They were deported from Hungary after being found on a train headed for Bucharest, Romania, in November 2015.
Was standing Counsel for the renowned Parliament Square protestor for several years for Serious Organised Crime & Police Act 2005 and public order offences.
Sultana has extensive experience of trial and appellate advocacy. She leads in lengthy multi-handed terrorism, homicide, and white-collar crime cases involving complex legal and factual matrices. She has a strong track record of appearing in the Court of Appeal in England & Wales. Sultana also advises and represents large Multinational Corporations on issues at the intersection of criminal law and human rights obligations across multiple jurisdictions.
Many of Sultana’s cases have a human rights dimension. She has vast experience in successfully challenging expert evidence relating to hi-tech evidence (phone & computer, cell site & call data, social media & internet); scientific evidence (forensic, medical, pathology, psychology & psychiatry); ‘gang’ related evidence (drill music, affiliations & memberships, police ‘expert’ evidence, joint enterprise); financial evidence (banking & accounting evidence, surveillance & search warrants, disclosure & abuse of process). Some of the cases she has acted in (in addition to the ones listed above) include:
21 counts of breach of notification requirements by a terrorist offender.
Preparation of acts of terrorism (Section 5, Terrorism Act 2006) and possession of items likely to be useful for purposes of terrorism (Section 58, Terrorism Act 2000). Allegations that the Defendant, along with others, took steps to carry out attack/s. The particulars of the offence were that the Defendant had a large arsenal of weapons at his home including firearms; that he had shared extreme right wing material and joined extremist chat forums; that he shared and exchanged information on making molotovs, explosive substances and firearms; that a 3D print gun was made; that a chat group was created and members were recruited to carry out acts of terrorism; and that a location/s and target/s had been identified. The case involved evidence relating to: (i) ‘prepping, survivalism and bushcraft’; (ii) Mindset material; (iii) the conflict between Russia v Ukraine; (iv) extensive hi-tech evidence from the seizure of devices; (v) expert evidence relating to firearms and explosives; (vi) medical evidence; and (vii) evidence relating to undercover police officers and MI5 operative. Attracted national press.
S a young man of good character, who was remanded into custody for over 14 months, was unanimously acquitted of three terrorism charges after 4 hours of jury deliberation, following a 3-week trial at Winchester Crown Court. He had faced three counts of disseminating terrorist publications (Section 2, Terrorism Act 2006) over social media between February and May 2023. The Crown alleged that S had deliberately used social media to encourage acts of terrorism and provide assistance in the commission of acts of terrorism through the dissemination of a terrorist fitness manual, videos of unidentified Muslim fighters in combat glorifying martyrdom and a video of a Muslim foreign fighter calling on others to join with a view of encouraging Muslims to fight. Unanimous acquittal of all counts.
The trial involved in depth examination of several key issues including: (i) Geopolitical and historical issues around the legitimacy of conflicts in Afghanistan (1980s), Bosnia & Chechnya (1990s) and Ukraine (Present); (ii) The history and legitimacy of the mujahideen and Muslim foreign fighters across these conflicts; (iii) Western support in these conflicts/ proxy wars against Russia and the commission of human rights atrocities in these conflicts; (iv) Issues around Islamic law and the rules of jihad regulating the conduct of foreign fighters engaging in combat to protect civilian lives in those conflicts; (v) Cultural and linguistic issues including the use of nasheeds and Quranic verses; the marginalisation of young Muslim men post 9/11; as well as the impact of Islamophobia and surveillance of Muslim communities; (vi) Legal arguments around admissibility evidence and on the definition of a terrorist publication under s2 of the Terrorism Act 2006; (vii) Extensive alleged “mindset” evidence suggesting that SS had been radicalised online by anonymous ISIS and Al-Qaeda supporters through messages, nasheeds, documentaries, voice notes and internet searches; (viii) Reliance on “high tech” evidence to infer “mindset”. The Defence instructed 5 experts to deal with these issues. Attracted national press.
Written advice on sentence on conviction on two counts of failing to disclose information about acts of terrorism, contrary to sections 38B(1)(a) and (b) of the Terrorism Act 2000 relating to parity of sentence with co-defendants convicted of, amongst other offences, possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely acetone and hydrogen peroxide in circumstances that gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that the possession was of a purpose connected to the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism, contrary to Section 57(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. Attracted national press. Defendant received a suspended sentence.
Dissemination of terrorist publications. Defendant was convicted of six counts of possessing material likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism (Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000). The material indicted included six files that were schematics for the making of five 3D printed firearms and one firearm from conventional material. Expert evidence included (i) extensive hi-tech evidence; (ii) expert evidence on links between the extreme far right and the use of 3D printed firearms; (iii) expert evidence on Islamic language, theology and geopolitics. Attracted national press. Conviction and sentence currently under appeal.
Possession of terrorist publications. The Defendant, who had previously served a 12 year sentence for terrorism (from August 2008) was found guilty of one count of Possessing terrorist material, contrary to section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and three offences of Possessing an article for use in fraud, contrary to section 6 of the Fraud Act 2006, following a trial at Leeds Crown Court in November 2024. He was remanded ahead of trial after pleading guilty to two breaches of his Part 4 Terrorist Notification Order, under section 48 and 54(1)(a) of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 in February 2022. During the trial, an interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeal was made, challenging the trial judge’s decision to admit the Defendant’s convictions. The Defendant did not give evidence during his trial. Attracted national press.
KA, a young man of good character who had been remanded in custody for over a year awaiting trial, was acquitted of dissemination of three terrorist publications in May 2020 (Section 2, Terrorism Act 2006), and possession of a machete in circumstances which give rise to a reasonable suspicion that his possession was intended for a purpose connected with the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism (Section 57, Terrorism Act 2000) in October to November 2021. The jury returned unanimous verdicts of Not Guilty on all counts on the indictment in approximately 2 hours of deliberations. The Crown relied extensively on ‘mindset’ material to suggest KA had an ‘extremist’ mindset. This included reliance on videos, audios, nasheeds, social media messages and posts, and internet history, amongst others. The Crown suggested KA had been radicalised through exposure to ISIS, Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and other propaganda material. The Defence instructed technical experts to examine numerous seized devices, and an expert on culture, language, Islamic law, with experience of terrorist materials to assist. Unanimous acquittal of all counts.
The trial included detailed argument and examination on the following issues: (i) Extensive and successful legal arguments on ‘mindset’ material; (ii) The objective parameters of a terrorist publication under s. 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006; (iii) The change in burden and standard of proof in relation to s.57; (iv) Section 8 disclosure applications for evidence that may undermine the crown’s case and/or assist the defence; (v) The admissibility of expert opinion evidence on the subject of what may constitute a terrorist publication; (vi) Engagement of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights during an assessment of what constitutes a terrorist publication, and when assessing mindset material, including unpalatable speech; (vii) Geopolitical issues, including the background to the Syrian conflict and atrocities committed; the legitimacy of the Assad regime; whether specified militia groups in various parts of the world were religious or political in nature; (viii) Cultural and linguistic issues, including to what extent a passive prayer may be framed in the context of encouragement or inducement to commit acts of terrorism, significance of a Shahadah flag, and the use of certain Arabic terminology and their context dependent meaning; (ix) Theological issues, including examination of the belief system of various sects, types of Salafi and other Islamic groups, interpretation of verses of the Quran and Hadith, definition and scope of terms such as ‘khawarij’, and ‘takfir’, and the proper meaning of ‘jihad.’ Attracted national press.
Charged with possession of items likely to be useful for terrorist purposes.
Charged with dissemination of terrorist publications (section 2) and possession of items likely to be useful for purpose of terrorism (section 58). Defended A at the Old Bailey in a complex terrorism case involving allegations of disseminating extremist material online. The prosecution alleged that A, along with a co-defendant, operated a website hosting speeches by a ‘hate’ cleric. The case involved detailed analysis of online activity, expert evidence on radicalisation, and issues of intent, context, and freedom of expression under the Terrorism Act 2006.
Defendant charged with conspiracy to murder and engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, namely by carrying out knife attacks in Westminster Bridge. Part of first all-female cell dubbed ‘The Tea Party’. Pleaded guilty to section 5, Terrorism Act 2006, and received a life sentence with a minimum tariff of 16 years. Attracted national press.
Defendant accused of 12 counts of dissemination of terrorist publications and 1 count of possessing a document likely to be useful to a person committing an act of terrorism. Dubbed the ‘WhatsApp Terrorist’, the case involved complex arguments around intent, freedom of expression, and the defendant’s claim that the material was accessed solely for research and curiosity purposes. Most of his sentence was served upon conviction as a result of an electronically monitored qualifying curfew on bail. Attracted national press.
Along with ‘hate preacher’ Anjum Choudhury, R was charged with inviting support for ISIS between June 29, 2014, and March 6, 2015. The prosecution presented evidence that both individuals made public statements endorsing ISIS and its self-declared caliphate, without condemning the group’s violent actions. One of the first prosecutions under this provision. Attracted national press. Landmark case.
Defendant accused of preparation of acts of terrorism in planning to go to Syria to join IS and disseminating terrorist publications. It was alleged that he travelled and tried to join ISIS in Syria, having training for battle at a paintballing centre alongside three other men linked to the group. Attracted national press.
High profile case where Defendant, along with two others, was acquitted of preparing for acts of terrorism, contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006. It was alleged that he, along with the others, planned to go to Syria to fight alongside ISIS. He was arrested with a co-defendant in the back of a lorry in Dover. The case involved the examination of extensive hi-tech material, social media evidence, ‘mindset’ evidence, evidence of ‘association’ and ideology, geopolitics of Syria and Iraq, and surveillance evidence. Attracted national press. Unanimous acquittal.
Charged with numerous counts of s.5 of the Terrorism Act 2006, preparation for acts of terrorism, amongst others, they were the brothers of the ‘five star jihadi’ who was killed in battle in Syria. The defence challenged the prosecution’s case on the basis of association, circumstantial evidence, and intent. Despite conviction, extensive mitigation was advanced. The Defendant received a sentence of 6 years imprisonment, to serve half in custody. Attracted national press. The judge explicitly declined to impose an extended sentence.
Defendant accused of engaging in terrorism in Somalia. He was charged with 7 counts of fundraising and 4 counts of engaging in conduct in preparation for acts of terrorism. Pleaded guilty. Attracted national press.
Counter-terrorism prosecution for grievous bodily harm against a religious education teacher. Pleaded guilty. Attracted national press.
Landmark case where Defendants were acquitted of conspiracy to cause explosions with intent to endanger life in the 7/7 bombings of the London transport system. The Defendant was acquitted in the retrial of helping the bombers plan the 2005 attacks, following a complex and highly sensitive case involving extensive surveillance evidence, association with the perpetrators, and significant public scrutiny. The defence emphasised the absence of direct involvement, highlighting the distinction between past associations and criminal intent. This landmark case required careful handling of national security issues, historical context, and the rights of the accused in terrorism prosecutions. Attracted national press. Jury hung in first trial; acquittal in retrial (2009).
Successfully defended WA, an 18-year-old accused of plotting to target members of the British National Party in a high-profile terrorism trial at Leeds Crown Court. He was accused of possessing ‘bomb-making manuals’ and chemicals for the purpose of terrorism, to ‘blow up the BNP’, The defendant was acquitted of all three counts of possessing articles for a terrorist purpose, following a jury trial in which the defence challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of online material and intent. The case involved sensitive issues around political expression, adolescent curiosity, and digital evidence. Attracted national press. Unanimously acquitted of all three counts.
Appeal against conviction and sentence for preparation of acts of terrorism (Section 5, Terrorism Act 2000) of a phd student who was accused of having built a drone designed to deliver a warhead or chemical weapon for Islamic State. Received a life sentence with a minimum tariff of 20 years imprisonment. Attracted national press.
Appeal against conviction and sentence of six counts of possession of material likely to be useful for purposes of terrorism (Section 58, Terrorism Act 2000). The documents relate to 3D printing of firearms. Attracted national press.
Interlocutory Appeal to the Court of Appeal of a ruling on the law and to the admissibility of evidence, namely bad character evidence, pursuant to s.31(3) CPIA 1996 made during a preparatory hearing. The Appellant faced a trial at Leeds Crown Court on a four-count indictment alleging possession of possession of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism contrary to s.58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and three counts of possession of articles for use in the course of or in connection to any fraud contrary to s.6 of the Fraud Act 2006. He had previous conviction/s for terrorism. Attracted national press.
Appeal against sentence for offences of preparing acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2006, s. 5. The Appellant had pleaded guilty to a single offence of preparing acts of terrorism and was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a minimum term of 16 years. SB was convicted of two counts of the same offence and was sentenced to custody for life, with a minimum term of 13 years. Both renewed their applications for leave to appeal against their sentences. Attracted national press.
The Appellant was convicted of multiple terrorism offences, including dissemination of terrorist publications under section 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006. The central issues on appeal involved the trial judge’s directions to the jury regarding the definition of a “terrorist publication” and the protection of the defendant’s rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which safeguards freedom of expression. This case underscores the balance courts must maintain between protecting individual rights and ensuring public safety, particularly in the context of counter-terrorism legislation. Attracted national press. Significant case.
Appeal against convictions and sentence of 5 years and 6 months’ imprisonment for inviting support for a proscribed organisation (ISIS), contrary to s.12(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000. It was argued that the Appellant’s statements were protected by freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. The case clarified the legal threshold for “inviting support”. Attracted national press. Landmark Case.
Interlocutory appeal on the legal ingredients of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 as to what amounts to ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation’, in this case, ISIS. It clarified the scope of Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, particularly concerning the balance between freedom of expression and national security. It establishes that individuals can be convicted for inviting support for a terrorist organization even without direct incitement to violence, provided the invitation is made knowingly. The case has been cited in subsequent legal discussions and judgments concerning the limits of lawful expression and the definition of support for proscribed organizations. Attracted national press. Landmark case.
Landmark guideline case on sentences for Section 5 Terrorism Act 2006, preparation for acts of terrorism. The Court of Appeal addressed multiple appeals and an Attorney General’s reference and, in the absence of detailed sentencing guidelines for such offences, provided comprehensive guidance. Represented the Appellant, Ziamani, in the appeal. He was convicted under section 5 for preparing an act of terrorism, specifically plotting to behead a British soldier. He was sentenced to 22 years imprisonment, with a minimum term of 14 years and 8 months, plus a 5 year extended licence. His custodial sentence was reduced on appeal to 19 years. Attracted national press. Sentence reduced. Landmark case.
Appeal against sentence. Reduced. Possession of sawn-off shotgun, 46 rounds of expanding ammunition & 29 rounds of ammunition in the context of gangs. Sentence reduced.
Sentence reduced. Junior Counsel representing Sayed Al-Haddad who was involved in disturbances during the Gaza Protests in London in January 2009. Attracted national press. Sentence reduced.
Undue pressure and the appropriate circumstances in which to give a Watson Direction.
Joint enterprise murder in the context of a drugs dispute. Involved CCTV evidence that purportedly captured the incident whereby the victim was stabbed to death. Extensive use of mobile phone evidence.
Joint enterprise murder involving ‘gang members’ alleged to have been involved in a gang turf-war. Involved a reconstruction of the journey to the scene of the murder using CCTV and other footage.
Joint enterprise murder involving a car crash whereby victim was chased and stabbed. Defendant left the jurisdiction and later returned to face trial. Involved CCTV evidence, scientific evidence as well as evidence from witnesses at the scene.
Defendant accused of drugs offences in the context of a multi-handed case involving conspiracy to murder; conspiracy to possess firearms with intent to endanger lives; conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm. Involved extensive cell site & phone evidence.
Attempted Murder on a joint enterprise basis involving gangs using machetes. Extensive CCTV evidence showed the incident unfolding and captured nine stab wounds to the victim being inflicted.
Murder involving shooting and the hiring of hit-men in the context of a drugs debt. Extensive cell-site and CCTV evidence.
High profile conspiracy to murder where defendant was accused of commissioning hit-men to assassinate the victim after a long-running feud.
Multi-handed case involving firearms, drugs and money laundering in the context of gang-related violence and allegations of ‘set-up’ by Flying Squad officers.
Retrial for manslaughter having been acquitted of murder in drugs ‘turf war’. Cut-throat defence involving hostile witnesses.
High profile case involving a single punch manslaughter of brother of England footballer. Evidence involved complex neurological and medical evidence given by numerous prominent medical experts.
Sultana advises state parties and non-governmental organisations on matters concerning disputes between states including genocide, violations of the laws of armed conflict, the investigation and the prosecution of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in domestic courts and the International Criminal Court. In addition to litigation, she engages in a wide array of advisory, consultancy, and capacity-building activities in these critical areas. Sultana advises and represents state parties and organisations on matters including:
Case concerning referral of complaints to the International Criminal Courts and use of domestic Universal Jurisdiction for the prosecution of these offences.
Case concerning the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Domestic criminal liabilities for breaches of international law and human rights obligations of companies operating on State’s territories.
Advising on violations during an ongoing armed conflict and issues surrounding the applicability of self-defence.
Contributed to Report adopted by five UN Special Rapporteurs and submitted to the UN Human Rights Council. Focused on the jurisdiction of the European Court on Human Rights on secret renditions.
(in relation to a high-profile trial in Africa). Focused on defendants’ right to silence upon arrest, questioning and interview and whether, and to what extent, adverse inferences could be drawn.
Work included investigation and intervention in ‘urgent action’ cases of arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and disappearances. Projects included the War on Terror, the Darfur Crisis, violence against women and children in armed conflict.
Worked on law & order issues relating to post conflict Iraq; analysing the Iraqi Constitution, the Penal Code, and the justice system in relation to international human rights and humanitarian law. Assisted in drafting recommendations to the Coalition Provisional Authority in relation to extra-territorial application of Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) and the Human Rights Act (1998).
Advice on the granting of blanket and specific amnesties for grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Considered cases before UN complaints mechanisms, European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission, and Universal Jurisdiction provisions of states.
Sultana represents individuals and organisations on the engagement of treaty-based and regional human rights complaint procedures in human rights complaints including the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee, and the Special Procedures mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Council. She has a particular expertise in cases involving the right to freedom of religion & belief, right to freedom of expression, and the right to protest, engaging Articles 9, 10 and 11, and in matters concerning the right to liberty and the right to a fair trial, engaging Article 5 and 6. Her notable cases include:
Asmeta v France, concerning the violations of the various rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). (2023-Ongoing)
Asmeta v France, concerning the violation of the right to freedom of religion as a result of a hijab ban on female Muslim lawyers in France. (2023-Ongoing)
Asmeta v France, concerning the right to be free from discrimination. (2023-Ongoing)
Asmeta v France, concerning a violation of the right of minorities to enjoy their culture and practise their religion, as a result of the imposition of the hijab ban. (2023-Ongoing)
Asmeta v France, concerning the impact of the hijab ban on female Muslim lawyers who, therefore, cannot exercise independence from the State. (2023-Ongoing)
Asmeta v France, concerning a violation her right to bodily integrity by imposing a hijab ban on female Muslim lawyers. (2023-Ongoing)
Challenging the decision of the French Cour de Cassation (the highest court of appeal in France) on 2 March 2022, that endorsed a ban by the Lille Bar Council that prohibits French lawyers wearing the hijab or other markers of faith in court. The Cour de Cassation said the ban was necessary to ensure the ‘independence of lawyers’, the ‘equality of citizens’, and the ‘right to a fair trial’. The application against France at the European Court of Human Rights, assert violations of Articles 6, 9, 10, 13, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Advice on application on behalf of women prisoners in Chechnya who were refused parole and consideration of caselaw under Article 5, 6 and 8 to challenge the decisions. European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).
Advice in case requesting precautionary measures for journalist breaking news of assassination of a special prosecutor investigating the President of Argentina. Latin American Centre for Human Rights (CLADH).
Application for suspension of Interpol Red Notice of British national in the Middle East, subjected to an arrest warrant, imprisonment, frozen assets, travel ban and extradition request. Fair Trials International.
No5 is pleased to announce that twelve members have been listed in the 2025 Pro Bono Recognition List. Now in its second year, the list…
SS, a young man of good character, who was remanded into custody for over 14 months, was unanimously acquitted of three terrorism charges following a…
No5 is pleased to announce that twelve members have been listed in the 2025 Pro Bono Recognition List. Now in its second year, the list…
SS, a young man of good character, who was remanded into custody for over 14 months, was unanimously acquitted of three terrorism charges following a…
