Inquest finds terror control measures contributed to prisoner's death

Akhtar Uddin was 35 years old, a builder from east London, when he died in HMP Wandsworth on Christmas Day 2021. He had been in prison for just under two years, locked up for breaking the terms of a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure—a government control order imposed on people suspected of involvement in terrorism but never charged with a crime. On Tuesday, an inquest jury concluded that the restrictions placed on him had a substantial impact on his mental state, and that the prison service had failed to provide him the support he needed. It was the first inquest ever to examine the effects of TPIMs on a person's wellbeing.

TPIMs are a tool of last resort, the government says, used to manage people deemed too dangerous to walk free but against whom there is insufficient evidence to prosecute. The measures are severe: electronic tags, curfews, forced relocation, bans on internet use, controls on spending, restrictions on who you can see and where you can go. When Uddin's TPIM was first imposed in January 2020, he was arrested at the prison gates in front of his sister who had come to meet him on his release. He was then forcibly moved to the West Midlands. The full reasons for the order were kept secret from him—they were based on MI5 intelligence and remain classified. What Uddin understood was that he had made reckless statements while under the influence of drugs, and that he had associated with people MI5 regarded as involved in terrorist activity. He insisted he was not a terrorist. He had over 20 previous criminal convictions, but none for terrorism offences.

Uddin breached the TPIM 12 times by withdrawing more money than the order permitted. The inquest heard he spent much of it on drugs. For these breaches, he was convicted under terrorism law and sent to prison in February 2020. Inside HMP Wandsworth, almost no one knew about the TPIM. Prison staff were unaware of the restrictions placed on him or what they might mean for his mental state. A governor at the prison later accepted in evidence that this lack of knowledge had resulted in treatment that was, in his words, "unintentionally cruel." The coroner noted that "very few people, if any" at the prison knew about Uddin's order, its revocation, or the possibility it might be reimposed.

As his release date approached in early 2022, Uddin became consumed by fear. He believed the TPIM would be imposed again. His former solicitor had told him in autumn 2021 that there were "highly limited prospects" of having it legally overturned. Uddin feared that if the order returned, he would breach it again because of his drug use, and the cycle would repeat. His sister Jasmine told the inquest that in the weeks before his death, he described counter-terrorism officers questioning him in prison, telling him he would never get off the TPIM. Dr Richard Latham, a forensic psychiatrist who gave evidence for the coroner, concluded that Uddin had an undiagnosed personality disorder and associated psychological vulnerabilities. The prospect of facing the TPIM again, Latham said, would have created "distress and a sense of hopelessness." TPIMs are designed to create isolation, the doctor explained, but that isolation plays on psychological vulnerability and can deepen emotional isolation.

The inquest jury issued four formal conclusions. They found that the original TPIM and its unusually restrictive nature had a substantial impact on Uddin's mental state. They found that his fear of the order being reimposed—and the possibility it might never end—had a significant impact on him in prison. They found that prison services, unaware of TPIM restrictions and their likely effects, had failed to provide support tailored to his specific needs. And they concluded that Uddin died as a result of an action he took, though they said it was "not possible to determine whether he intended the outcome to be his death."

Coroner Bernard Richmond KC said Uddin was "loved and loving" but was "not someone without his troubles," and those troubles centered on drug use. Yet the coroner also said he had seen nothing in the state's assessment showing any concern for risks to Uddin himself—only assessments of the risk he posed to others. He noted a "paucity of support for people subject to TPIMs" and said there is a potential risk to others under these measures. For this reason, he will issue a preventing future deaths report to the government.

The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, has previously noted that the Home Office recognizes poor mental health as a dominant feature among recent TPIM subjects, along with neurodivergence including autism. A government spokesperson said TPIMs are "a last resort" and are "carefully considered and strictly focused" on stopping involvement in terrorist activity. The government is dealing with a prison crisis it "inherited," the spokesperson added, and is improving training to help staff manage risks of self-harm and suicide.

Uddin's family, represented by solicitors Birnberg Peirce, welcomed the inquest's findings. "Although nothing can bring back their loving son, brother and uncle," their statement said, "they hope that this will make a real difference to those who are currently at the mercy of this inhumane regime." The coroner's report will now go to the government. What happens next, and whether the findings prompt any change to how TPIMs are imposed or managed, remains to be seen.