Scotsman: 23rd October 2001
Reports leak slammed

THE family of murdered Asian waiter, Surjit Singh Chhokar, yesterday condemned the apparent leak of reports into the official handling of their son’s case. Details of an inquiry into the treatment of Mr Chhokar’s family over the course of two murder trials were widely reported in weekend newspapers. The report by Dr Raj Jandoo is one of two to be put before the Scottish parliament tomorrow, which are expected to criticise the Crown Office and Strathclyde Police for their roles in the case.

Mr Chhokar’s family yesterday wrote to the First Minister, Henry McLeish, seeking answers to a string of questions surrounding the documents, which have not yet been made available to the family. They have demanded to know where the documents were leaked from, and why only "selective aspects" were released.

Back to Top

22nd October 2001
To Henry McLeish, First Minister

Fao
First Minister
Henry Mcleish 22nd October 2001

Dear Mr McLeish

We are writing to you in your position as the First Minister, with ultimate responsibility for the Scottish Executive. We write with deep concern in the run up to the publication of the Campbell and Jandoo Inquiries

We had hoped that both Inquiries would have addressed the failure of the Crown Office to successfully prosecute Surjit's killers and the insensitive and racist manner in which our family was treated, but it would now appear that was never the intention.

We are deeply upset that despite assurances that there would be no leaks of the Inquiries prior to their publication, that over the course of the weekend drafts of the reports have appeared in the Sunday press and that the Daily Telegraph on Saturday appears to have received a copy of the report. In a letter to our representative Aamer Anwar on the 18th October, the Solicitor General stated: 'I would be grateful if you would contact me to make suitable arrangements for the reports to be passed to Mr and Mrs Chhokar. As discussed today the information concerning the date of publication and provision of a copy of the reports to Mr and Mrs Chhokar is subject to confidentiality prior to publication on the afternoon of 24th October. I am grateful to you for indicating that you are agreeable to this subject to the matter being made public by the Parliamentary business managers.'

We also understand that an agreement was reached between our representative Aamer Anwar and the Solicitor General that a full translated copy of the Jandoo report in Punjabi would only be provided at future date so as to ensure that there were no leaks. The Solicitor General continues: 'I can confirm that it is our intention to provide a full Punjabi translation of the Jandoo report. This is being prepared and will be provided to Mr and Mrs Chhokar once available. You will recollect our earlier conversation about translation and our mutual concerns about leaks given the scale of the Jandoo report.'

It would seem that journalists have been given more respect than the feelings or wishes of our family or the Scottish Parliament. We were denied a request to the Lord Advocate to be given copies of the reports well in advance of their publication. Once more our family has been treated with insensitivity and contempt. It would appear that journalists are more important than a family who have lost a loved one. Even before the official publication of the reports it would appear the purpose is to attempt to smear our family or our representative Aamer Anwar. We thought the purpose of the Inquiries was to investigate the Crown Office not to treat us as criminals. We are truly grateful to Aamer Anwar who has fought on our behalf with courage, honesty and without fear. How dare Dr Jandoo or anyone else criticise Aamer's role as our lawyer or spokesperson. No one has worked as hard as he has in our struggle for justice and we condemn completely the attacks on him, which we see as a direct attack on our family.

If the leaks are accurate, we condemn completely the lies and inaccuracies contained in them and believe the intention is to divert attention from the main issues. We have found the leaks of the report to be a further insult to our family and attempt to patronise us as 'fools'. Since the beginning of the Inquiries, leaks have continuously been made of the findings of the Jandoo Inquiry. This was one of the concerns we expressed, when we reluctantly decided to withdraw from the Inquiries.

We have a number of questions that we would request that you answer:

1. Who authorised the leak?

2. Will you order an immediate investigation into the source of the leak?

3. Why has the Jandoo Inquiry been the only one, since the setting up of both Inquiries to have leaked to the press?

4. Does the continuous leaks not question the purpose, independence and impartiality of the reports?

5. What was the purpose intended by leaking selected aspects of the Jandoo report?

6. Why was the Daily Telegraph an English Newspaper given a copy of the report before our family or the Scottish Parliament?

7. The Solicitor General Neil Davidson QC assured our representative Aamer Anwar on Friday 19th October, that under no circumstances did the leak come from the Crown Office. Does this mean that the leak could only have come from the Justice Department?

8. In our last meeting in Edinburgh the day after the verdict, you stated that after the Inquiries you would meet with us at any time or place of our choosing. We now hope that you will keep that promise and officially request a meeting with you on the morning Thursday the 25th October.

Our lives have been torn apart by people who were totally insensitive to the effects of their actions. All we had left was a hope for accountability as we knew we would never get justice. No one should forget that Surjit Singh Chhokar was murdered and the Crown failed to bring his killers to justice not on one, but two occasions. We have committed no crime save that of campaigning for justice and hope that as First Minister that you will answer our questions.

Yours sincerely

Manjit Kaur Sangha (Sister of Surjit Singh Chhokar)
Gurdev Kaur Chhokar (Mother of Surjit Singh Chhokar)
Darshan Singh Chhokar (Father of Surjit Singh Chhokar)

Back to Top

Guardian: Monday October 22, 2001
Scottish justice system faces charge of racism

Deepa Shah

Sections of Scotland's criminal justice system are expected to be branded "institutionally racist" this week when two reports into the murder of a Sikh waiter are published.

Surjit Singh Chhokar, 32, was stabbed to death on the street outside his home in Wishaw, North Lanarkshire, in November 1998 in a row over a giro cheque. Three white men were charged with his murder; each blamed the others and all were acquitted after two separate trials.

The first inquiry, by the senior Northern Ireland judge Sir Anthony Campbell QC, focused on how the crown prosecuted its case. The second, by Scotland's first Asian advocate, Raj Jandoo, focused on the justice system's treatment of the Chhokar family. Dr Jandoo's inquiry is said to criticise Strathclyde police for a lack of sensitivity in dealing with a murder in the Asian community and the Crown Office for not providing an interpreter.

Back to Top

Scotland on Sunday: 22nd October 2001
Crown Office branded ‘institutionally racist’ by Chhokar murder reports

MURDO MacLEOD AND LIAM McDOUGALL

A SENIOR Scottish judge will be criticised over the Crown Office’s botched handling of the Surjit Singh Chhokar murder case. Lord Hardie, who was Lord Advocate at the time Chhokar was killed, will be blamed in a report into the case for leading a prosecution service at "breaking point".

It is also expected the Crown Office will be branded "institutionally racist" in the report, which will be handed to MSPs this week.

It is further understood that the race equality campaigner Aamer Anwar, who acted as a spokesman for the Chhokar family, will be criticised for his role. The report will claim Anwar’s activities were damaging to the interests of the family. Chhokar, 32, was murdered in Wishaw in 1998. Three men were charged with the killing but after blaming each other at two separate trials, all walked free.

The family’s grief at the failure to secure a conviction was compounded by the failure of police and Crown Office officials to keep them properly informed about developments in the inquiry and trial. The results of two inquiries into the case will be presented to MSPs this week. The first, by senior Northern Irish judge, Sir Anthony Campbell QC, will focus on how the Crown prosecuted their case. The other, by Dr Raj Jandoo, Scotland’s first Asian advocate, focuses on the system’s liaison with the Chhokar family.

Both reports are expected to be critical of Hardie , of the Crown Office itself, and the way police conducted their inquiries. An insider said: "Hardie was in charge of a prosecution service which was in a culture of crisis. The buck has to stop with someone - that’s him." A senior lawyer added: "Jandoo is unlikely to be concerned about the fact that judges and law officers and senior policemen will be criticised."

Anwar commented: " What will be interesting to note is what the report has to say about the role of Lord Hardie. This will be the most damaging case for the Crown Office in years and yet they held an inquiry behind closed doors. How do they expect us to believe that it wasn’t a cover -up?"

Jandoo was not available for comment.

The Crown Office is expected to be branded ‘institutionally racist’ for its inability to deal with the needs of ethnic minorities - a judgment which will provoke outrage within Scotland’s prosecution service.

While the inquiry will not accuse the service of outright racism, race equality campaigners claim that an organisation should be termed institutionally racist if it fails to meet the needs of members of ethnic minorities.

Kate MacLean, the chair of the Scottish parliament’s equal opportunities committee, said: "Institutional racism is not always about ill-will and prejudice. If a service is less accessible to members of an ethnic minority, and that lack of access is damaging to them, then it’s institutional racism. Just because it’s unwitting, doesn’t mean it’s less damaging."

Labour party sources have told Scotland on Sunday that they expected Jandoo’s report to highlight a critical shortage of personnel and resources within the prosecution service, especially at the office in Hamilton, which dealt with the case. One source said: "To call it overstretched would be something of an understatement. There is a culture of crisis in the area and in the fiscal’s service as a whole. People have been working all hours to prepare cases, going home at 11pm, it’s just been too much."

A Crown Office memo on the case describes how it was allocated to a relatively inexperienced fiscal who had worked for the service for only 18 months, and who lacked the necessary training.

Back to Top

21st October 2001: Sunday Herald
Chhokar report: Crown Office 'racist'
S tephen Naysmith

THE police, the Crown Office and many other aspects of Scotland's criminal justice system are branded institutionally racist in a report to be published on Wednesday examining the case of Surjit Singh Chhokar.

The Sikh waiter was killed in 1998, stabbed in the street in a scuffle with three men, each of whom was acquitted of murder over the course of two separate trials. Following the collapse of the second trial last November, the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd set up two inquiries into the bungled handling of the case. Sir Anthony Campbell QC was commissioned to conduct a judicial inquiry examining decision making during the prosecution process. Meanwhile, advocate Dr Raj Jandoo was to head up an inquiry into the Crown's treatment of the family during the course of the trial.

The Sunday Herald has learned that Jandoo's report confirms that institutional racism was a factor in the errors made in investigating the case, and in the treatment Chhokar's parents Darshan and Gurdev Chhokar received from the courts . By contrast the Campbell inquiry has absolved the Crown Office of making errors based on race. Instead, it concludes that the decision to prosecute Ronnie Coulter in March 1999 without bringing the other two accused, Coulter's nephew Andrew Coulter and another man David Montgomery, to trial was flawed.

This 'bad judgement call' was based not on race but was simple incompetence due to bad communication and under-resourcing, Campbell's report will argue. Taken together the reports serve to complicate a story which has been cast as 'Scotland's Stephen Lawrence case'. Jandoo's report criticises Strathclyde Police for lacking sensitivity in dealing with a murder in the Asian community. It also accuses senior officers of being 'evasive' when taking part in the Jandoo inquiry. It says the Crown Office left the Chhokars in the dark. This included arranging meetings with Mr and Mrs Chhokar but failing to provide an interpreter, and sending them untranslated letters full of complicated legal jargon.

But Jandoo goes further. His report looks at issues of legal education and training, interpreting and victim support and finds elements of institutional racism in all of them. Controversially, it also includes extensive criticisms of Aamer Anwar, the Chhokar family's spokesman and lawyer.

Anwar is described in the report as having overridden the wishes of Surjit Singh's parents and failed to interpret accurately for them. The report says that he took on a heavy responsibility when he became the spokesman for the Chhokar Family Justice Campaign. 'I cannot conclude that he discharged it competently or honestly,' it says. 'He interfered or attempted to interfere with the prosecution to the point where his actions jeopardised the case.' The Lord Advocate Colin Boyd is slated in the report for actions which are described as 'ill thought-out and damaging'. Jandoo's report also claims that Mr Chhokar's ability to speak English appears to change, according to the circumstances.

Last night the Chhokar family reacted furiously to the leaking of sections of the report and angrily defended Anwar. Manjit Kaur, the Chhokar's daughter, speaks both Punjabi and English and was frequently present when Anwar was translating for her father. She said: 'The first thing about my father is that he can't be forced into anything he doesn't want to do. Aamer Anwar wasn't putting any words into anyone's mouth and it is insulting to claim otherwise. We waited until August last year, nearly two years before the courts offered us an interpreter.'

She added that the family were disgusted at having to field such questions: 'I want to know exactly what went wrong with the investigation into my brother's death and who was to blame for the racist way the family was treated.' Anwar said the Chhokar family had failed to take part in the inquiry because they feared a whitewash, and they had been proved right. 'I thought these inquiries were about the failure of the Crown to prosecute the killers. Dr Jandoo was supposed to be examining the treatment of the family.'

He said it was not his place to defend his role, but that he had represented the family to the best of his ability. He added: 'However, it is patronising to the Chhokar family to suggest that they are gullible simpletons who can't make their own decisions.

'In publishing information about Mr Chhokar, and attempting to smear the family Dr Jandoo is beneath contempt. Is this the way they continue to treat this family? Have they learned nothing?'

Anwar also called for an investigation into the leaking of the reports.

The reports will officially be published on Wednesday and copies of both are currently in the hands of Justice Minister Jim Wallace and Lord Advocate Colin Boyd

Back to Top

5th July 2001

PRESS RELEASE IN RESPONSE TO JUSTICE MINISTER JIM WALLACE' ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING CONSULTATION ON INDEPENDENT BODY TO INVESTIGATE POLICE COMPLAINTS.

RELEASE BY AAMER ANWAR- MEMBER OF JUSTICE MINISTER’S STEPHEN LAWRENCE STEERING COMMITTEE AND SPOKESPERSON FOR CHHOKAR FAMILY JUSTICE CAMPAIGN.

An Independent Police complaints system and for the police to be made subject to the same laws and procedures as the ordinary citizen is long overdue. I am however disappointed that the Justice Minister Jim Wallace is once again ten steps behind England by still talking of an independent element rather than a wholescale reform of the present system. At present there seems little justification for the secrecy surrounding the way in which we are policed and enormous sums of our money spent, other than to protect police wrongdoing. Why do police complaints reports remain secret once there is a decision not to prosecute anyone? The Lawrence Inquiry recommended that they should not, yet there has been no response to this in Scotland.

The present police complaints system is utterly discredited. Setting up an independent system will require government money but this is a small price to pay to avoid other Lawrence cases. The police are at the sharp end of law and order they have a special role in society and special powers and with those powers goes a responsibility to serve and be accountable to all sections of the community. In that sense the police, like teachers and social workers, should be in advance of society, not its rearguard.

The present Police Complaints system has lost the confidence of the black community because it has failed to uphold their legitimate complaints of police racism. In Strathclyde alone there has not been a single substantiated complaint of racially discriminatory behaviour by a police officer and the pattern. In 1999 when I presented the report on Independent Police Complaints to a cross-parliamentary meeting my research showed that in Scotland if one had a substantiated complaint there was still only a 1 in 1000 chance of succeeding with the complaint. I am still the only black person in Scotland to have won a case against the police, but even that victory in 1995 was in a civil action.

The existing body for the investigation of complaints into the police via the Police and Procurator Fiscal Service, is not independent. The PF has to base it decisions on evidence collected through investigations carried out by the police themselves, at best by another police area. An independent investigatory body is essential to restore public confidence in policing. The perception of the public is that police officers guilty of negligence, incompetence or breaking the law generally escape both criminal proceeding and internal disciplinary action appropriate to the offence. If officers face any disciplinary action, it is usually found that a police officer who has already retired is the guilty party, but their pension is left intact. Serving officers are kept out of the disciplinary procedures or face minimal charges.

In other words the police are seen to ‘protect their own’. How can they expect the confidence of the public in their role of upholding the law when they effectively protect members of the force who are guilty of breaking the law?

The overwhelming weight of the evidence suggests that the present system for investigating complaints and preparing evidence for disciplinary action is inadequate, it cannot break through the mechanisms between police officers for protecting each other and the investigating team are seen to ‘turn a blind eye’ as they are themselves police officers. This de facto protection of the police from real disciplinary consequences must end.

What Wallace proposes is only a halfway house when he talks of an independent element. For real democratic accountability, control of police complaints must be taken away from them just as it will be in England and Wales. If the Police have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear from real accountability, its about time that the Scottish Executive committed themselves to a truly independent police complaints body not another quango.

Back to Top

Guardian: Tuesday May 22, 2001
Relatives walk out of 'racist' murder inquiry

Vikram Dodd

An official inquiry into the murder of an Asian man was yesterday left teetering on the edge of collapse after his grieving family walked out claiming they had been "treated like fools". The family of Surjit Chhokar said they would not testify before an inquiry into allegations that racism was behind a string of blunders. They are demanding a public inquiry.

Three men have been cleared of murdering the 32-year-old waiter, who was stabbed to death outside his girlfriend's home in Lanarkshire in November 1998.

Mr Chhokar's parents broke down in tears as they told the inquiry, sitting in Glasgow, of their grief.

The case had led to accusations of racism in Scotland's criminal justice system and allegations that the Chhokar case is Scotland's equivalent to the Stephen Lawrence embarassment for London's police. But the Chhokars' anger was also directed at the inquiry, chaired by Raj Jandoo, examining how the crown office -Scotland's prosecuting body- handled the case. The inquiry was held behind closed doors, with yesterday's session one of only two to be heard in public. The murdered man's mother, Gurdev, broke her two year silence about the case yesterday.

In a statement read to the inquiry Mrs Chhokar said: "I no longer have a life, all I hear are my son's cries for help in my sleep or in my dreams. We never asked you people for much - just justice, to know that you would bring my son's killers to account for their crime. That will never happen now. Now with these inquiries, what have you done other than to protect the people who failed us?"

As well as the refusal to hold the inquiry in public, the Chhokar family have been angered by reports that Dr Jandoo has already written a draft of his report based on testimony received to date. It is reported that he will find that police were institutionally racist but that the crown office was merely incompetent in its decisions and how the family was treated. The dead man's father, Darsham, told Dr Jandoo: "What we need is a full public inquiry. I am not an educated man but you cannot treat us like fools. There is no justice in this country for black people. I am fed up with you people. In two courtrooms you could not give us justice."

The family said they would also boycott a second inquiry chaired by an Ulster judge into the decision making process. That inquiry will also hear evidence behind closed doors.

Last night a spokesman for the crown office said: "What happens with the inquiry is entirely up to Dr Jandoo."

Moussa Jogee, deputy chair of the commission for racial equality in Scotland, said: "Many questions remain unsolved and it is time to get the reports out in public so that speculation can end."

The inquiries were announced in November last year by the Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, after a trial in which Andrew Coulter, 23, from Wishaw, and David Montgomery, 19, from Motherwell, were cleared of murder. The pair blamed Andrew Coulter's cousin, Ronnie Coulter, 32, from Wishaw, who had been cleared of the killing at a previous trial.

You can read the Family's prepared statement in full by clicking HERE

Back to Top

Independent: 22nd May 2001
Family of stabbed Sikh waiter walks out of inquest

By Terri Judd

The family of a Sikh waiter stabbed to death in the street yesterday walked out of an inquiry into the failed murder investigation in a protest at the way they have been treated. The killing of Surjit Singh Chhokar has been described as Scotland's equivalent of the murder of black London teenager Stephen Lawrence. No one has been convicted.

The victim's father, Darshan Chhokar spoke in Punjabi as his wife Gurdev, covered her face. "The pain and grief of the last two and a half years will never leave us," he said. "Surjit was our only boy and our hope for life. We had dreams and expectations for him but they are all finished.

"Our family has been destroyed. I say again, I want an independent public inquiry. I am fed up with you people. In two courtrooms you could not give us justice."

The 32-year-old Sikh waiter, from Overtown, Lanarkshire, was killed outside his girlfriend's home in 1998. Three men charged over the death blamed each other for the murder during two separate trials.

Yesterday the Glasgow public session of an inquiry chaired by Dr Raj Jandoo into the Crown Office's treatment of the Chhokars was told the suspects declined to give evidence.

After the hearing, Aamer Anwar, lawyer for the family, said Mr Jandoo's inquiry and the investigation by Sir Anthony Campbell, of the Supreme Court of Northern Ireland, into the decision-making process had been "utterly discredited".

The two inquiries were announced in November last year at the end of the second trial, in which Andrew Coulter, 23, from Wishaw, and David Montgomery, 19, of Motherwell, were found not guilty of murder. They blamed Mr Coulter's cousin, 32-year-old Ronnie Coulter, of Wishaw, who had been cleared at a previous trial.

In a statement to yesterday's hearing, Mr Anwar said both inquiries had been compromised by their terms of reference. He accused the Jandoo inquiry of leaking findings that branded Strathclyde Police institutionally racist but found the Crown Office was incompetent rather than racist.

Mr Anwar added: "I pay tribute to the courage, tenacity and perseverance of the Chhokar family, They never wanted to be campaigners, but the Scottish criminal justice system gave them little alternative. Today is not the end."

You can read the Family's prepared statement in full by clicking HERE

Back to Top

Herald: 22nd May 2001
Chhokar family boycott inquiry

Craig Watson

THE family of murdered waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar yesterday launched a scathing attack on an inquiry into the case and a damning criticism of its chairman before walking out of a public hearing.

The victim's mother, Gurdev, gave a statement for the first time about her grief at losing her son, and his father, Darshan, made an emotional plea for an independent public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the case. Aamer Anwar, the lawyer acting on behalf of the Chhokar Family Justice Campaign, told the chairman, Dr Raj Jandoo, it was the "end of your inquiry" before walking out.

As The Herald revealed last week, the family and its representatives were the only people to speak at the public session as dozens of other individuals and organisations heeded a boycott - called for by the family - of the event. The failure of others to give evidence in public and the refusal of the family to answer questions from Dr Jandoo led to claims that the process was "utterly discredited".

The inquiry was one of two set up in November last year after a second High Court trial failed to find anyone guilty of murdering the 32-year-old waiter from Overtown, Lanarkshire, in 1998. Dr Jandoo, an advocate, was charged with examining the treatment of the family, which it was acknowledged had been flawed, and whether institutional racism was involved. However, Dr Jandoo was accused of failing to meet the needs of the family.

Speaking through an interpreter, Mr Chhokar told the inquiry: "You think you can make me a fool but you cannot make a fool of the public. Please give me justice and a public inquiry because you cannot give me back my son." Mrs Chhokar said: "The love between a mother and son is strong, my darling son may be gone but my love for him will give me the strength to continue fighting for the truth, not your lies."

Mr Anwar told the inquiry: "A mother and father have been forced, through the love of their son, to become campaigners. There have been times when I have seen them emotionally tired, their tears dried up and unable to stand or walk further, but they have carried on in the hope they will get justice for their son. We had hoped that hope could be renewed by your inquiries, but it is clear that was never the intention. We do not understand how your inquiry can claim to be drawing to a close when the key individuals, the Chhokar family, have not even given evidence. Today is not the end, but it is the end of your inquiry, Dr Jandoo. We cannot assist you in a cover-up and condemn your treatment of the Chhokar family." He added that Dr Jandoo had "failed" in his attempt to stage an inquiry, adding that the advocate was doomed to fail as he was "junior counsel" instructed to question senior Crown staff. He added: "We have found it surprising that you have refused to accept or deny the accusation that you are a close personal friend of the previous lord advocate, Lord Hardie, who presided over the first half of this case." He also said it was "shocking that you have abused your position as head of this inquiry by leaking findings before all the evidence had been gathered."

Speaking after the hearing, Mr Anwar said both Mr Jandoo's inquiry and the inquiry by Sir Anthony Campbell, Justice of the Supreme Court of Northern Ireland, into the decision-making process had been "utterly discredited".

Dr Moussa Jogee, the deputy chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, spoke of concerns about the Chhokar inquiry and called for reports to be published this month to enable a full assessment of the findings.

Dr Jandoo expressed sympathy for the "pain and sorrow" the family had suffered but was not available for further comment.

You can read the Family's prepared statement in full by clicking HERE

Back to Top

Scotsman: 22nd May 2001
Parents' fury as Chhokar hearing ends in chaos

John Staples

A PUBLIC hearing into events surrounding the murder of waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar collapsed yesterday after the dead man’s parents denounced it as a sham. Darsham Singh Chhokar, his wife, Gurdev, and their lawyer were the only people to turn up to speak at the latest part of the Jandoo inquiry in Glasgow.

It was set up by the Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, to look at whether racism affected the murder investigation or the failed prosecution which followed. The inquiry is also examining whether there was racism in the treatment of the family in the aftermath of the killing.

Mr Chhokar made a passionate 20-minute speech through an interpreter in which he insisted that nothing short of a full public inquiry would do. Three men were charged in connection with the murder but, despite two court cases, no-one was convicted. The family had written to all those whom the advocate Dr Raj Jandoo had asked to appear, calling on them to boycott the planned two-day hearing. The parents claimed the Crown Office was riddled with institutional racism and branded the prosecution service as a "colonial gentleman’s club, stuck in the dark ages".

Aamer Anwar, the lawyer acting for the Chhokar Family Justice Campaign, told Dr Jandoo it was "the end" for his inquiry and called for the affair to become an election issue. Afterwards, Mr Anwar said the inquiry and a separate investigation, headed by the Northern Irish judge Sir Anthony Campbell, into why no-one had been brought to justice, had been utterly discredited. Mr Chhokar, a waiter at an Indian restaurant, was stabbed to death outside the home he shared with his girlfriend in Wishaw, Lanarkshire, in 1998.

Ronnie Coulter, 32, was originally charged with the murder but was found not guilty after he blamed his nephew, Andrew Coulter, 19, and his friend David Montgomery, 23. Andrew Coulter and Montgomery were later tried for murder, but they in turn accused Ronnie Coulter. Montgomery walked free, while Andrew Coulter was sentenced to 12 months for assault.

Yesterday, Mr Anwar said: "For months we have heard the words institutional racism and unwitting racism. There was nothing unwitting about the manner in which the system treated this family."

There have been claims that the Jandoo inquiry was flawed because a draft report had already been written ahead of the public sessions, based on the evidence of 50 witnesses taken in private. Dr Jandoo’s investigation has also been dogged by complaints about his links with the Labour Party and his close associations with the Crown Office.

Yesterday, Mr Chhokar described his anger at the way the Crown Office had handled the case. He said: "Everybody knows who killed my son, yet they could not get a sentence.

"We have been denied justice, and I beg for a genuine public inquiry into Surjit’s death."

You can read the Family's prepared statement in full by clicking HERE

Back to Top

Evening Times: 21st May 2001
Chhokar mum: All I hear is son´s cries

THE inquiry set up to examine the handling of the Surjit Singh Chhokar murder case ended in chaos today when the family of the dead man refused to give evidence. The Chhokar family had earlier appealed to potential witnesses to boycott the public inquiry, being held in the old school building in Holland Street, Glasgow, because most of the hearings were scheduled to take place in private. The probe had been set up six months ago after two trials at the High Court in Glasgow failed to secure a murder conviction against three men accused of Mr Chhokar’s killing in 1998.

But despite their opposition to the hearing both Mr Chhokar’s father, Darshan, and family spokesman Aamer Anwar gave statements to chief investigator Dr Raj Jandoo. The most poignant moment in today’s proceedings came when a statement was read out from Mrs Chhokar, who has never spoken publicly about her son’s death.

The statement read: “I no longer have a life. All I hear are my son’s cries for help in my sleep or in my dreams. I cry for my only son I have lost, because I can never hold him again and tell him how much I loved him. I have cried so much that at times there are no more tears. We never asked you people for much – just justice, to know that you would bring my sons killers to account for their crime. That will never happen now. And now with these inquiries what have you done other than protect the people who have failed us?”

In a prepared statement Mr Anwar accused the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd of violating and abusing the Chhokar family’s civil rights by not providing them with sufficient information during the inquiry. He said the Crown Office had held a public inquiry behind closed doors and said the hearing was a ‘tokenistic attempt to trick the black community into giving your findings their stamp of approval’.

Mr Anwar said: “We do not even know what sort of inquiry you (the Crown Office) have conducted because you did not even grant Mr and Mrs Chhokar the right to know who would be called to give evidence. "They were not even given the right to know what questions were asked and what answers were given. So what sort of inquiry is this? We have repeatedly said that without the Chhokar family you have no inquiry. We do not understand how your inquiry can claim to be drawing to a close, when the key individuals, the Chhokar family, have not even given evidence.”

A tearful Darshan Chhokar said his family had been destroyed by his son’s death.

Mr Chhokar said his family still did not know what had happened in the two previous court cases and appealed for a ‘full independent inquiry’ into the handling of the case.

Mr Chhokar said: “The pain and grief of the last two and a half years will never leave us. Surjit was our only boy and our hope for life. We had dreams and expectations for him but they are all finished. Our family has been destroyed and we still don’t know what happened in those last two court rooms. Everyone knows who murdered my son. I want a full independent public inquiry because we can’t get justice in the court room.”

You can read the Family's prepared statement in full by clicking HERE

Back to Top

Scotsman: 21st May 2001
Father addresses Chhokar inquiry Back to Top

Tom Gordon

THE father of the murdered Asian waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar will today speak for the first time in public about his anger at the handling of his son’s death. Darsham Singh Chhokar will make a personal statement at the opening public session of the Jandoo Inquiry in Glasgow, which is investigating possible racism within the Scottish criminal justice system. Mr Chhokar had previously stated he would refuse to attend the meeting. However, it is understood the family have become increasingly angry with the way the Crown Office is dealing with the aftermath of the murder and wish to air their views.

Surjit Chhokar, 32, was stabbed to death outside his girlfriend's flat in Wishaw, Lanarkshire in 1998. Ronnie Coulter, his nephew, Andrew Coulter, and their associate, David Montgomery, were all acquitted of the murder. The failure to convict anyone raised serious questions about the competence of the Crown Office and two inquiries were launched as a result. Dr Raj Jandoo, a leading advocate, is close to concluding his examination of how the family were treated by the police and the courts. A separate inquiry by Sir Anthony Campbell, Justice of the Supreme Court of Northern Ireland, is assessing the decision-making process within the judicial system.

The Chhokar family had previously stated they would refuse to co-operate with the Jandoo inquiry because it was taking evidence in private. However, last night the lawyer representing the family, Aamer Anwar, said: "Myself and Mr Chhokar will be making statements to the inquiry. After I have spoken, Mr Chhokar will speak. It will the first time he has done that, in person, and in public. However, we have made it clear to Mr Jandoo that we don’t consider his inquiry to be adequate or independent."

Earlier this month a leak suggested the Jandoo Inquiry was set to brand Strathclyde Police "institutionally racist". The circumstances of the leak frustrated both the force and the family.

Back to Top

CFJC Press Release: 21st May 2001
Re Inquiry into Family Liaison - Public Session

The Inquiry chaired by Dr Jandoo will hold a public session at the Glasgow City Council Building at 79 Holland Street, Glasgow at 10.00 Hrs on Monday 21st May.

As you may be aware the public sessions have been condemned by the Chhokar Family as an attempt by the Inquiry to legitimate itself. The reality is that all critical evidence has been led behind closed doors with the family's lawyers were not given the right to access evidence or cross examine witnesses or even know what is happening. Dr Jandoo has failed to answer the concerns of the Chhokar Family in over 5 months as a result the family had called on all organisations and individuals to boycott giving to evidence to the Public Session.

We would urge you to attend the public session and show your solidarity purely for the statement to be given by Mr Darshan Singh Chhokar the father of Surjit Singh Chhokar and of Aamer Anwar, legal Spokesperson Chhokar Family Justice Campaign. We would urge you not to take part in the public session if invited to do in support of the family's demands for a genuine independent public inquiry. If you have banners please bring them.

Please arrive at 9.30am when the family will arrive and make a short statement, to be followed at 10am by the session which we expect to last for a maximum of an 45 mins. The struggle for justice is not over and the Chhokar family are determined to keep fighting for accountability and the truth.

Back to Top

Herald 18th May 2001
Chhokars call for inquiry boycott

CRAIG WATSON

THE inquiry set up to examine the handling of the Surjit Singh Chhokar murder case seems set to descend into "farce" next week as only the family will turn up to give evidence at a public session, it has been claimed. While the family has asked other individuals and organisations to boycott proceedings, they themselves will attend to make a statement before advocate Dr Raj Jandoo in Glasgow. Darshan Chhokar, the father of the victim who was killed in Lanarkshire in 1998, and Aamer Anwar, spokesman for the Chhokar family justice campaign, will read statements at the public hearing on Monday, although it is not known what they will say.

It had originally been planned to hold public sessions on Monday and Tuesday but the second sitting will not now take place. The inquiry has been dogged by controversy since it was established six months ago after two high court trials failed to secure a murder conviction against three men. The Crown Office was accused of institutional racism in its handling of the case, which it denied, although it acknowledged that mistakes were made in the way prosecutors liaised with the family.

Dr Jandoo was appointed by Colin Boyd QC, the lord advocate, and Jim Wallace, the justice minister, to review the arrangements between the police, the procurator-fiscal, the Crown Office and the Chhokar family. He was instructed to obtain "information and comment" from the family and other key organisations, such as the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE). Dr Jandoo was also asked to examine the findings of an internal Crown Office report and consider whether institutional racism was a factor in the case.

It has been reported that Dr Jandoo will accuse the police of institutional racism, although that has not been confirmed.

Mr Anwar yesterday described the Jandoo inquiry as a "farce", particularly the public session. He said: "This is an attempt to legitimise his inquiry by showing it has some public element, while all the the main witnesses have already given evidence behind closed doors." He added that the family had refused to give evidence in private and expressed his appreciation that most trade unions and black and ethnic organisations had heeded the call for a boycott. Mr Anwar added: "The fact that so many organisations have refused to take part reflects the strength of support for a genuine public inquiry."

A CRE spokeswoman said the organisation had no plans to take part in the public session. She said the inquiry should have been held in public and involved lay experts, such as those from CRE. She added: "We have always had concerns about the way the inquiries have been set up and we don't have any further contribution to make since meeting Dr Jandoo in April."

Three months ago, the Chhokar family boycotted a parliamentary committee meeting which was examining how the Jandoo inquiry was set up. They complained that Mr Wallace and Mr Boyd had been asked to give evidence while the family had not. MSPs eventually decided it would be unfair to question the lord advocate and justice minister and not the family.

Dr Jandoo is due to report his findings to Mr Boyd and Mr Wallace by the end of this month. A Scottish Executive spokeswoman confirmed yesterday that the public session was due to take place on Monday but declined to comment further.

Back to Top

Scotsman: 14th May 2001
Key witnesses pull out of Chhokar racism inquiry

By Jill Stevenson

AN inquiry into racism within the Scottish criminal justice system following the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar was last night descending into farce after key witnesses announced their intention to pull out.The family of the murdered waiter have refused to participate in the Jandoo inquiry which was set up to investigate the way they had been treated by both the police and the courts. A leading racism academic has also signalled her intention to ignore pleas for her to give evidence in Glasgow later this month.

The fresh inquiry was set up by the Lord Advocate following the failure of the Crown to secure a conviction against any of the three men tried for the Lanarkshire killing. However Mr Chhokar’s family are furious over leaked reports that Dr Raj Jandoo has already compiled his findings, which allegedly acknowledges institutional racism within the police force. However, his report clears the legal system where, it is claimed, failure is based on incompetence rather than racism.

Yesterday Darshan Chhokar, Surjit’s father, said: "I am angry at the way my family has been treated. We did not ask for anything special, just for an inquiry to be held in public. However, now we are left wondering how much they are hiding. For the last two years the Crown Office has treated my family badly. We have been treated like fools. Now Jandoo has done the same. The legal establishment has a record of covering up and now they are trying to blame the police."

A second inquiry, led by Northern Irish judge Sir Anthony Campbell, has also been set up to investigate why no-one has been brought to justice for the1998 killing. Meanwhile, Dr Elinor Kelly, a race relations specialist at Glasgow University, said yesterday she would be declining an invitation to speak to Dr Jandoo. Dr Kelly said that taking part in the inquiry could damage her reputation, in the wake of the alleged leak.

Chhokar Family Justice Campaign spokesman Aamer Anwar has now written to Dr Jandoo demanding assurances that the family will be allowed to speak freely at the inquiry. The lawyer said: "The decision to appoint a junior counsel like Dr Jandoo to a major inquiry is like sending a corporal into the officers’ barracks to investigate the generals. We are demanding that the Chhokar family can make a full statement during the public session."

Ronnie Coulter, his nephew, Andrew Coulter, and their associate, David Montgomery, were all acquitted of the murder.

Back to Top

11th May 2001
CFJC Letter to Dr Jandoo Regarding the Inquiry

Dear Dr Jandoo

CHHOKAR INQUIRY- FAMILY LIASON

I refer to your letter of 11th May 2001. You claim to have collected a significant amount of evidence about the facts of the case, but appear to have forgotten that the only evidence you will have collected is that of the Police or Crown Office and not of the Chhokar Family and its representatives.

This Inquiry was set up to look at the manner in which the Chhokar Family were treated yet the family's wishes have once more been sidelined and treated in an arrogant manner. The family has since March 1999 asked for an Independent Public Inquiry but after the verdict in November 2000, offered a number of concessions to both the Lord Advocate and the Inquiry teams to able to take part in the Inquiries. They now feel that meetings with the Lord Advocate, with Henry McLeish and Jim Wallace and with both Inquiry Heads, were nothing more than a PR exercise. Not one response has been received from all the meetings, not one issue has been addressed, not one concession granted. The family had hoped that the Crown Office and the Scottish Executive would be serious about carrying out an impartial investigations that would be publicly accountable. But all parties concerned have been entrenched in their positions and refused to concede on any issue. As a result the Chhokar family have been unable to take part in these Inquiries and a cover-up has taken place ordered at the highest levels.

The Inquiry's attempt to hold 2 public sessions on the 21st May is just another desperate attempt to give the Inquiry some authority as the main parties to the event have already given their evidence behind closed doors. Those invited to give evidence have played no role in what happened to the Chhokar family It is against principles of natural justice that the Chhokar family are denied the right via their lawyers to question the parties who gave evidence to the Inquiry. In the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry the Lawrences were granted that right. We hoped you would have understood that the family have no confidence in an Officer of the Crown questioning other Officers of the Crown, and playing the role of judge, defence and jury. We are aware that you have approached a number of organisations to give evidence, but the majority have refused because of the family having little confidence in the Inquiry. Did you really think that Surjit's life was so cheap that his parents would just accept whatever you proposed. Can you imagine if the clock was turned back and the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry had been held behind closed doors. Imagine like the Chhokars, the Lawrences had been denied the disclosure of evidence, denied rights of representation and the Chairman had not had lay advisers with expertise in race appointed to assist him. It would have been just another cover up.

We met with you in February to express concerns and a number of requests were made to both yourself and Sir Anthony Campbell in terms of the family's right to legal representation, disclosure of all evidence to the family, widening the terms of reference, feeding into the Campbell Inquiry, appointment of lay advisors with race experience, the holding of the whole Inquiry in public rather than behind closed doors. Yet despite what you considered to be a positive meeting nothing was offered to the family in the last three months. You now attempt to claim you have been waiting for a list of requests, but a copy of these requests were with you from the beginning as the meeting was minuted.

As we explained at the time, such concessions could only assist the Inquiry and show that it has nothing to hide, yet for over four months you have continued to conduct the Inquiry in the format set up by the Lord Advocate. You have done nothing to show that you were determined to meet the family's concerns and address the wider issues of impartiality, transparency and openness and now we are to understand your Inquiry is coming to an end. You state in your letter of 10th May 2001 that you have 'endeavoured to assist them with the concerns they have raised'. The reality is the family have heard little more than words. What was required was proof of practice and there has been none forthcoming The issue of costs is now irrelevant with regards to your Inquiry, as I now represent the Chhokar family in my own annual leave, as a result of your intervention and attempts to dictate to my firm whom should represent the Chhokar family.

We believe that you are now deliberately widening your net in a desperate attempt to legitimate your Inquiry with the backing of some voices from the black community. We were concerned to see an article in the Scotland on Sunday on the 6th May 2001, leaked by your Inquiry. Whilst it states that you refuse to make any comment it is clear that the information must have come from yourself. The author of the article Murdo McLeod was actually introduced by you to myself, over a year and a half ago as your close personal friend. You recommended him as the person to use to get stories into the press. We find it shocking that as the head of an Inquiry you should abuse a position of trust and leak findings before the Inquiry has reached its conclusion.   How can conclusions be reached before the Inquiry has run its course and the evidence gathering is not at an end? It appears then, that were the Family to give evidence to your Inquiry it would make no difference, as the conclusion has already been decided by the Crown Office. We do not understand what the basis of the leaked findings were.

At the onset of the Inquiry we predicted that if a person in the pay of the Crown was appointed, it was likely that others would be scapegoated for the failures of the Crown. Whilst we accept that the Police are institutionally racist and there were problems in their role in the case, the primary focus of the Campaign has been the role the Crown Office played. It was not the Police who failed to successfully prosecute the killers of Surjit Singh Chhokar but the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. The fundamental basis of complaints from the Chhokar Family have been against Crown Office and the Procurator Fiscal Service. We fail to see how you can accuse the Police of being institutionally racist but deny that the Crown Office are also. My experience and the Chhokar family's has been of a Crown Office run like a gentleman's club, stuck in the dark ages and riddled with institutional racism. Whilst incompetence and underfunding is an issue these factors were compounded by the racism that the Chhokar Family faced and that is why comparisons to the Stephen Lawrence case were made. I was also shocked at the manner in which Christopher Cawleys family were treated hence why they received our backing.

It is clear that no lessons have been learned by the Crown Office, apologies are too little, too late. In some aspects the Crown has demonstrated even greater resistance to accountability and fighting racism than the Police. The recent BBC Frontline Scotland programme declared that Scotland had the most unaccountable Legal system in the Western World. It is only in such a system that the previous Lord Advocate Lord Hardie could resign before the start of this case and make himself a judge and beyond accountability.

It was made clear from the onset that any cooperation would be on the basis of what changes you were willing to accept. You claim in your letter of 15/03/01 that the 'Inquiry can only take evidence in a manner consistent with established procedures', but our understanding from the meeting was that it was very much in your hands on how you wish to proceed with the Inquiry. Yet it is now clear that it is indeed the Lord Advocate that is deciding everything in relation to how your Inquiry proceeds. You will be aware that the Inquiry you are conducting is not a Judicial Inquiry nor is it a Public Inquiry conducted according to the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Tribunals of Inquiry 1966 and the principles laid out by Lord Salmon, but despite having been asked on several occasions, you failed to clarify for the family what the 'established procedures' of the Inquiry you referred to in your letters were. You have consistently failed to address the concerns of the Chhokar Family of your position as Junior Counsel being appointed to conduct this Inquiry. An Inquiry which we understand would require robust questioning of senior Crown Counsel, some of whom you will rely on for work in your position as an Advocate Depute. We find it bizarre that on one level a Supreme Court Justice from Northern Ireland was appointed to prove independence but on the other hand a junior member of the Scottish bar in the pay of the Crown was appointed to head an Inquiry into the role of Crown Officers.

The concerns expressed by the Sunday Times article (11/03/01) on your closeness to Lord Hardie still stand. Indeed on several occasions in meetings with me over the course of the year prior to the Trial you spoke of your close relationship to the Lord Advocate, whom you relied upon for appointment as a temporary Sheriff and then Advocate Depute, and indeed many years ago were given your first break in the case of Rev MacLeod. We are surprised that you have felt that there was no need to comment on the allegations or questions raised, especially considering that your impartiality and your ability to conduct an Independent Inquiry has been called into question.

Let us reiterate once more for you in the strongest possible terms, that the Chhokar family had hoped you would take steps to inspire confidence in your Inquiry's ability, impartiality and determination to search for the truth but this has not happened. In your letter you stated that unless the family were willing to meet with you by the 15th May then you would accept that they do not intend to take part in the Inquiry. We understand that you have a timetable that you wish to meet, but you once more have failed to take Mr and Mrs Chhokar's sensitivities and needs into account. We would request that you implement fully the requests that were made to you in February as per the list forwarded in your last letter. We also request that Mr Chhokar and myself are allowed to make a submission in the public session on Monday 21st May. We shall ask for you to grant this one wish and the family has stated that they shall not meet with you prior to that occasion. We shall also not have our submissions scrutinised prior to the 21st May by yourself. The Chhokar family request a time in the morning of Monday 21st May at 10am to be granted. We also wish to make it clear that no evidence will be presented but a statement issued on behalf of the family.

Since your Inquiry was founded the family has had little basis for regarding both Inquires with confidence and trust and they feel you have failed your duty to search for the truth. They found at times the pressure from yourself and others unbearable as you have attempted to pressure them into giving way on principles that are dear to them. They determined to carry on the fight for justice and accountability.

Yours Sincerely

Aamer Anwar MA(Hons), PgDip, LLB, Dip.LP.
Legal Spokesperson for the Chhokar Family Justice Campaign

Back to Top

Scotland on Sunday: 7th May 2001
Racism claim provokes fury among police

Hamish Macdonell Scottish Political Editor

SENIOR officers believe the police force is being targeted in a campaign to brand it racist over the murder of Asian waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar, it emerged last night.They are furious over claims, published yesterday, that the official inquiry into the case would condemn Strathclyde Police as "institutionally racist".

Superintendent Fred McManus, President of the Scottish Police Superintendents Association, called for the report to be published as soon as possible.He said this was the only way the police could be exonerated and an end put to damaging speculation about alleged racism within the force. Supt McManus insisted that the police had conducted the investigation into Mr Chhokar’s death efficiently and professionally and they were not to blame for any mistakes in the handling of the case when it reached court.

Mr Chhokar, 32, was stabbed to death outside his girlfriend’s Wishaw flat in 1998. Three men have been tried for the murder but all have been acquitted. The failure to convict any of the three men for Mr Chhokar’s murder caused outrage and raised serious questions about the competence of the Crown Office. Two inquiries were launched as a result.

Sir Anthony Campbell, Justice of the Supreme Court of Northern Ireland, was asked to conduct a judicial inquiry into the decision-making process, and leading advocate Dr Raj Jandoo was commissioned to investigate the way the prosecuting authorities handled relations with the Chhokar family. Dr Jandoo’s report is due to be published by the end of this month. He declined to say anything about it yesterday but Labour sources were reported as claiming that the document would brand Strathclyde Police "institutionally racist" over their handling of the case.

Sources close to both the Justice Minister Jim Wallace and campaigners fighting for justice on Mr Chhokar’s behalf said they knew nothing about the claims. Supt McManus said: "We must get this report out in the open. The police acted efficiently here and made arrests within three days and reported to the Crown Office. We welcome the report because hopefully it will remove any unjustified criticisms."

Another senior officer, who did not want to be named, said the police were getting increasingly frustrated with the allegations of racism. He said: "I have never known the police to give anything less than 100% in trying to investigate a crime like this and to suggest that somehow, because an individual comes from an ethnic minority, the police would not try as hard is absolute rubbish." The officer said that there were fears within Strathclyde Police that officers would get some of the blame for the bungled prosecution but insisted this would be totally unfounded. If Strathclyde was to be labelled "institutionally racist", it would be a major blow to the force, which will announce the name of its first independent race relations adviser later this week.

John Orr, the retiring Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police, issued a brief statement yesterday while he was on holiday, but refused to be drawn into commenting on allegations about the report’s findings. He said: "We have been made aware of press speculation in relation to this inquiry. We have no knowledge whatever about the developments in the inquiry or the content of the report. I will respond in full when the report is published."

Campaigners for the Chhokar family were outraged that officers ruled out a racial motive for the killing early in the investigation, but the focus of their anger has been on the Crown Office. The lawyer representing the Chhokar family, Aamer Anwar, said claims of racism within the police appeared to be nothing more than a smokescreen to hide the blame, which should be attached to the Crown Office. He said: "The Crown have investigated themselves and let themselves off the hook. The whole thing stinks of a cover-up. The police have major problems with racism, but they accept that. The issue here is whether the Crown Office and the Lord Advocate were institutionally racist. This steps up our case for a full public inquiry. We are calling for an independent, immediate public inquiry into the handling and the prosecution of this case."

A spokesman for the Crown Office declined to comment.

Back to Top

Scotland on Sunday: 6th May 2001
Police Racist Says Chhokar Inquiry
Report into murder of Asian waiter accuses Strathclyde Police of institutional racism

By Murdo MacLeod Political Correspondent

SCOTLAND’S biggest police force is to be branded ‘institutionally racist’ by the official inquiry into the murder of Asian waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar, Scotland on Sunday can reveal.

Senior Labour sources say Strathclyde Police’s handling of the killing, in particular the early decision to rule out any racial motivation for the murder, will be sharply criticised in the inquiry’s report, due at the end of this month. But the inquiry, being led by advocate Dr Raj Jandoo, will controversially clear the Crown Office of overt racism in its dealings with the case, which saw nobody convicted of Chhokar’s murder despite two separate trials. Instead, the inquiry is understood to have determined that the prosecution’s failures - and its subsequent attitude to the victim’s family - are the result of plain incompetence and weaknesses in the system.

The findings are likely to spark fury from the police, who believe they have been made scapegoats for the affair, but are also likely to disappoint race equality campaigners who believe the Crown Office’s behaviour has fallen far below acceptable standards. Informed Labour sources say they expect Strathclyde Police to be labelled ‘institutionally racist’ - the epithet applied to the Metropolitan Police by the Stephen Lawrence inquiry - over a key complaint made by Aamer Anwar, the race equality activist and spokesman for the Chhokar family. Anwar was outraged that officers ruled out a racial motive for the killing early in the investigation of the death of Chhokar, a 32-year-old who was stabbed in Wishaw in November 1998. The decision led to claims by race campaigners that the police did not take a possible racial motive - and therefore race crime in general - seriously.

The finding will be bitterly resented by officers, who believe that the failure to secure convictions in the case was due to failings by the Crown Office even though three suspects admitted being with Chhokar at the time of his death. In the first trial for Chhokar’s murder, the Crown accused a local man, Ronnie Coulter, of the killing. In a special defence, he blamed his cousin, Andrew Coulter, and a third man, David Montgomery, and was acquitted of murder. Andrew Coulter and Montgomery were then tried for Chhokar’s murder, but they in turn blamed Ronnie Coulter and were also acquitted.

The Chhokar family have since complained angrily about the Crown’s handling of the entire case, including the failure to keep relatives up-to-date and the advocate-depute’s disinclination to talk to the family during proceedings. Yet Labour insiders said racism had not been to blame for the Crown’s failings. "If you compare this case to other similar court cases, we see that the issue is not so much race as general uselessness," said one senior party source. Another Labour source added: "In some ways it might be simpler for Jandoo to find the Crown guilty of racism. But his problem is that he must justify what he says with evidence, and if the evidence isn’t there, well, it isn’t."

But Kate MacLean, the convenor of the Scottish parliament’s equal opportunities committee, claimed that the inquiry would be seen as flawed if it failed to criticise the Crown Office. She said: "An institution does not have to act maliciously to be considered institutionally racist... Unintentional racism is just as bad as intentional racism." Critics of the inquiry claim Jandoo is too close to Lord Hardie, the Lord Advocate at the time of the Chhokar affair. Jandoo and Hardie acted together as defence council during the notorious Free Kirk trial of 1996, which saw the Rev. Prof. Donald Macleod, of the Free Church College, cleared of charges of sexual assault.

A spokeswoman for the Crown Office said: "It would be inappropriate for us to comment ." Jandoo also refused to comment.

Back to Top

27th April 2001
CFJC to Address TUC
Black Workers Conference 2001

Aamer Anwar and Mr Chhokar will address over 500 delegates to the TUC Black Workers Conference on Saturday Morning, 28th April 2001 in Perth. They will lead the call for an independent Public Inquiry and outline our demands in the run up to the General Election.

A FRINGE MEETING will also take place in the afternoon:

Two years on from the Lawrence Report -
the next government must stamp out institutional racism"

Saturday 28th April 2001
1 - 2 pm
Gannochy Room
Dewar Centre

Chair: Gloria Mills, TUC Race Relations Committee

Speakers:
Aamer Anwar and Darshan Singh Chhokar - Chhokar Family Justice Campaign
Bernard Sylvester - Roger Sylvester Justice Campaign
Asad Rehman - Amnesty International
Milena Buyum - National Assembly Against Racism

Jointly organised by:
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY AGAINST RACISM
TUC RACE RELATIONS COMMITTEE
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Back to Top

25th March 2001
Attempt to Silence Chhokar Legal Rep

Dr Raj Jandoo, head of the government backed inquiry into allegations of racism in the Crowns handling of the Chhokar case, has written to the employers of Aaamer Anwar, who represents the family asking, on what basis the legal firm was representing the case. In response the firm have pulled out on the basis that they were not actually providing any recognised legal service to the family as Aammer is a trainee lawyer. A senior partner in the firm, commenting on Dr Jandoo's letter, confirmed that "Dr Jandoo asked which partner was dealing with this. A trainee is a fairly junior member of staff and he wanted to know as a matter of record which partner was dealing with the case.” Aamer Anwar has now effectively been forced into the position of pursuing the case in his own time. The firm have now giver Aamer more annual leave to pursue the case in a personal capacity: "We don’t want to make it difficult for him to continue to help the Chhokar family but he will do it in a personal capacity and we have given him more holiday." In an article in Scotland on Sunday (25/03/01) Dr Jandoo, whose independence has already been questioned because of his links to the Labour Party, refused to make any comment on his action, saying : "I don’t wish to know about it. I have a policy not to discuss anything to do with the inquiry". Clearly these developments will only fuel concerns already voiced that there is a concerted attempt to silence the campaign. Aamer Anwar has, however, now written to Dr. Jandoo to confirm that he will continue to act as the family’s legal representative. In his letter Aamer pointed out that "The Chhokar family found it deeply insulting and upsetting that you should seek to dictate to them, who they should have with them as their representative. There has never been any problem with my role as the family’s representative in dealings with the Lord Advocate, the Crown Office, the Justice Minister or the Procurator Fiscal Service, and [they] find it of grave concern that you... should question the family’s decision.

Back to Top

25th March 2001
Motion Submitted by Phil Gallie MSP

That this Parliament expresses grave concern over the impartiality of Dr Raj Jandoo, the head of the Executive Inquiry set up, following the acquittal of those charged with the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar, to investigate Crown Office / Procurator Service communications with the Police and the Chhokar family, particularly so given Dr Jandoo's most recent action which appears to have been an attempt to silence Aamer Anwar, the leading voice for the Chhokar family, and consider, that the Executive should examine Dr Jandoo's actions and take appropriate action.

Phil Gallie MSP

Back to Top

February 14, 2001 Guardian
Scots under fire for 'scratching surface' with anti-racism plans

By David Mitchell

The Scottish executive has come under fire from minority ethnic groups for failing to take on board the key lessons of the Stephen Lawrence inquiry.

The criticism came as a steering group, set up by the executive in the wake of the inquiry report two years ago, outlined the progress made during the last year and made a number of recommendations for further action. The executive accepted most of the Lawrence inquiry's 70 recommendations and unveiled an action plan in July 1999. But two key recommendations - that there should be a new independent body to investigate complaints against police, and that officers should be disciplined after retirement - were not fully backed and are still being considered. The steering group calls for the development of performance indicators for tackling racism among police and other public sector bodies, and for steps to be taken to ensure officers on the ground understand what is meant by a racist incident, such as a scheme in Lothian and borders where officers use a credit-card-sized aide-memoire. It also proposes a national code of practice for reporting racist incidents and that the executive should consider setting up a 24-hour hotline for reporting such incidents, similar to the service available for victims of domestic abuse. A Scottish version of English police guidance on combating hate crime should also be produced.

Scottish justice minister Jim Wallace said: "We have come a long way in the past two years and the steering group has made an invaluable contribution to this progress, providing outside scrutiny of the work of the police, crown office and others. But it is clear that much remains to be done. The handling of the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar reminds us starkly of that. The actions laid out in this review provide a challenging list of practical actions which the police, crown office, executive and others can address over the coming months and beyond."

Aamer Anwar, a leading race campaigner and spokesman for the Chhokar family justice campaign, which is calling for a public inquiry into the handling of the case of murdered Asian waiter Surjit Singh Chhokar, slammed the steering group as "toothless" and accused the executive of watering down the recommendations of the Macpherson report. "It's a superficial exercise going over the easiest parts without dealing with its fundamental aspects, which are about accountability and openness. They don't take account of the fact that officers on the beat have not taken on board the principles of Macpherson and the legacy of Stephen Lawrence," he said. "You won't find a single racist incident logged against a police officer in Scotland. Either they don't exist in Scotland or there is something wrong with the procedures and they haven't been changed. If racist officers are not sacked, this only increases the confidence of others who are racist." Mr Anwar said the measures themselves were welcome but failed to reach the heart of the problem. "The Macpherson report was all about was institutional racism - that people are denied access to the system and justice - and they haven't really tackled that. All those issues have been dodged," he said.

Robina Qureshi, director of Positive Action in Housing, which targets racism and ethnic minority homelessness in Scotland, and a member of the steering group, is dismayed that the group has no teeth to back its recommendations. "Efforts are being made, but not enough to say there is progress. We have no power to make anyone do anything. If they were clear and committed, we would have power behind what we are trying to do. Now, a year and a half later, it is just another report," she said. Ms Qureshi claimed the review didn't go far enough in tackling institutional racism. "They are afraid to recognise that the problems are at the root of their own system. We would like a programme of radical change to directly address institutional racism. The best way of doing that is to have a multiracial task force in each department - police, judiciary, fiscal and crown office," she said.

Vijay Patel, secretary of the black and ethnic minority infrastructure in Scotland, an umbrella group for black voluntary organisations, said the group's recommendations only scratched the surface of what was required. "They are pretty weak and I suspect a number of people could have come up with them a year earlier without forming a committee. The nicest thing I can say is at least the executive and criminal justice system are actually speaking to people who understand the issues," he said. "Unless you understand the values involved, you are on a hiding to nothing. Across the executive, a number of civil servants are struggling with the notion because they don't understand the concept of discrimination. Only when you understand that, can you then think about how to deal with it personally and institutionally."

Back to Top

Independent: 23 January 2001
The unpleasant stench of racism

By Deborah Orr

'These cases suggest the problems of institutional racism uncovered by the Macpherson report have not been dealt with at all'

An internal investigation launched at Feltham Young Offenders' Institution, in west London, after the murder of Zahid Mubarek, has produced "very, very troubling findings". This is not the least surprising. In a prison where a 19-year-old Asian, sentenced for very minor offences, is placed in a cell with a violent self-styled Nazi and is beaten to death hours before his release, any findings are bound to be troubling.

This report confirms the obvious, that there is a substantial degree of racism among the staff at Feltham, which finds an outlet not just in the treatment of prisoners, but also in the attitude to the minority of ethnic staff. The report by the senior investigating officer, Ted Butts, says: "Evidence found by the team suggests that a small number of staff sustained and promoted overtly racist behaviour, as well as more subtle methods, and that there are issues surrounding both staff and prisoners. "Staff from all ethnic groups told of an underlying culture that suggests the only way minority ethnic group staff can be accepted as part of the team of Feltham is by enduring racist comments and racist banter/jokes... Senior managers know what they should be doing but have not done it. This leads the enquiry team to form the conclusion that Feltham is institutionally racist."

And if this is what the staff have to put up with, what - apart from being murdered in their beds - do the prisoners have to endure? Half of the institution's 717 inmates are of Asian or Afro-Caribbean backgrounds, as are 11 per cent of its 654 staff. Prisoners from minority backgrounds are twice as likely to be put in the segregation unit, and twice as likely to have restraint force used against them.

The report also condemns the prison's complaints system, and highlights the fact that inmates' families tend to complain to the board of visitors rather than Feltham's management about racism. The board of visitors, in turn, alleges that prisoners are intimidated into staying quiet.

The report is confidential, and there are no plans to publish it. Robert Stewart, the 20-year-old murderer of Mr Mubarek, has already been convicted of murder and jailed for life. Mr Mubarek's uncle, Imtiaz Mubarek, has called for a full public inquiry into his nephew's death. The Commission for Racial Equality is due to investigate racism in Britain's jails, following the murder, while the Metropolitan Police is investigating whether prison managers should face charges of corporate manslaughter.

It is the latter course of action that seems most important to the Mubarek family lawyer, Imran Khan. The 36-year-old made his reputation as the man who finally won a full public inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, a case he took on while working for an East End law firm, JR Jones, only 18 months after qualifying. Now he has launched his own firm, Imran Khan and partners, which specialises in "cases that are dead and buried, resurrecting them and trying to make an impact with them". The fact that no public inquiry has yet been launched into Mr Mubarek's death certainly suggests that there are those who would like this case to be "dead and buried". But the leaked report from Feltham is so damaging that this now seems impossible.

Meanwhile, Khan has become involved in another case that authorities are keen to see "dead and buried", this time on the other side of the border. This case concerns Surjit Singh Chhokar, 32, a Scots Asian who was stabbed to death outside his home in Lanarkshire in 1998. His girlfriend, Elizabeth Bryce, witnessed the stabbing from the window of their council flat, and was able to identify Mr Chhokar's attackers as they were neighbours in the same block. Police at first denied that the killing had a racist dimension. The three attackers had stolen Mr Chhokar's Giro cheque a few days before, and the attack was considered as part of a chain of events set off by the theft. They pointed instead to the general atmosphere of lawlessness on the estate - and Gowkthrapple is indeed a place with its problems, unless things have changed a lot more than they look to have since I went to secondary school there. One of its problems, though, is indeed racism. However, despite the fact that a man was dead, that witnesses could identify his three attackers, that other witnesses told of a confession that stated "I killed the black bastard", and that all three men, when questioned, blamed the others for the fatal blow, only one man was initially put on trial.

The Chhokar family were not even told of this initial trial, in which Ronnie Coulter was found innocent of murder but guilty of assault. After campaigning from pressure groups, the other two men were eventually put separately on trial. The two were cleared of murder, while Andrew Coulter, the nephew of Ronnie, was found guilty of a reduced assault charge.

Despite the questions in this case, officials are hostile to the work of the Chhokar Family Justice Campaign, which is demanding a public inquiry into the handling of the case. They say that campaigners are hi-jacking the case to push forward an anti-racist agenda because of the failure of their campaign to highlight the case of another Imran Khan, this one an Asian schoolboy who died in hospital seven days after being stabbed in a gang-fight in Glasgow. A youth was detained for seven years in this case, for attempted murder, after the trial in 1998. Families of the white accused made openly racist comments. But the case somehow never broke through to highlight Scotland's racism problems.

The family has now been told that it will have to make do with two private enquiries, one into the treatment of the Chhokar family by the police and the criminal justice system, the other into the handling of the two criminal trials. Imran Khan and Michael Mansfield are helping the family to launch a campaign for a full public enquiry to be launched.

These two cases each have obvious implications in the wake of the Macpherson report, and strongly suggest that the problems uncovered by it of "institutional racism" have not been dealt with at all. The murder at Feltham and the killing in Gowkthrapple, and the secrecy with which the mistakes surrounding the two cases have been investigated, both stink of cover-up. As Mr Khan says himself: "The problem has not been the report itself, but the failure of the police in implementing the recommendations."

The Chhokar case has been dubbed "the Scottish Lawrence case". Campaigners present a compelling case when they list the similarities. Both men were attacked by a group of white men in a white area. In both cases, claims that there was a racist motive for the attack were dismissed by police. Police and prosecutors failed at every level to keep the dead man's family informed. Perhaps the Chhokar case will also, eventually, win its own public inquiry. What a tragedy it would be if, within less than a couple of years of the report being published, it too was being rubbished in the name of party politics, just at a time when it was becoming abundantly clear that, in actual fact, its lessons have not been learned at all.

Back to Top

Scottish Executive - Articles

All the following Links will open a page in a new window

Crown Meets Chhokar Family
CROWN MEETS CHHOKAR FAMILY ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE CROWN OFFICE Mr Frank Crowe, Deputy Crown Agent, today met with representatives of the family of Surjit Singh Chhokar at 1030 hours in the Crown Office, Edinburgh. The family were advised that the investigation relating to the death of Surjit Singh

Surjit Singh Chhokar murder - judicial hearing into Crown's decision making
ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE CROWN OFFICE

Two Men Indicted For Murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar
TWO MEN INDICTED FOR MURDER OF SURJIT SINGH CHHOKAR. Andrew Alexander Marshall Coulter (18) Wishaw, and David Shields Montgomery (22) Motherwell, have today been indicted for the murder of Surjit Singh Chhokar on November 4, 1998, in Wishaw.

Duty To Learn Lessons From Chhokar - Wallace
Justice Minister Jim Wallace has pledged that the Executive will redouble its scrutiny of the criminal justice system to make sure that racism is tackled effectively wherever it occurs.

Back to Top

Newspaper Archives

All the following Links will open a page in a new window

Times Archive

British News - Two cleared in second trial for death of waiter 29 Nov 2000

Magnus Linklater - Lawrence casts a dark shadow over Peckham 30 Nov 2000 - So deeply embedded is the Stephen Lawrence case in our national conscience that any attack on a black youth instantly raises the spectre of racism

Chhokars treated badly, says law chief 30 Nov 2000 - A report into the way the Crown Office handled the murder of an Asian waiter concluded that his family had been badly treated

Witness 'lied over waiters killing' 18 Nov 2000

Woman tells how boyfriend died 16 Nov 2000

Chhokar family denied public inquiry 29 Nov 2000 - Scotland's top law officer says public inquiry would take too long

Family demand murder case inquiry 29 Nov 2000

Two cleared in second trial for death of waiter 29 Nov 2000

Back to Top

Guardian Archive

A voice for victims in Scotland
January 25 2001

Victims of crime in Scotland are to be given a say in the criminal justice system for the first time under a new strategy unveiled by Scottish justice minister Jim Wallace.

Stabbing that exposed Scots racism
December 08 2000

On a dark winter's night Surjit Singh Chhokar got out of his car and slammed the door. It had been a long shift at the restaurant and in one hand he carried a takeaway curry and in the other a bottle of Irn Bru. He was a Scots Asian.

Anger at acquittals on death of Asian man
November 29 2000

The parents of an Asian man who died violently branded the Scottish criminal justice system "institutionally racist" yesterday after watching two men charged with their son's killing walk free from court.

Anger at acquittals on death of Asian man
November 29 2000

Call for justice follows murder
March 23 1999

The father of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence yesterday backed a campaign set up to seek justice for an Asian man who was stabbed to death.

Suffering in silence
March 21 1999

Darsham Singh Chhokar was not told when the trial of his son's killer was about to begin. He and his family learnt the details from relatives who had read about it in a newspaper.

Lord Advocate attacks critical Scottish judge
March 12 1999

Scotland's senior law officer has attacked a leading judge as 'uninformed and ill-advised' in an unprecedented row over a murder with similarities to the Stephen Lawrence case.

Back to Top

Ananova Archive

Chhokar family walks out of public inquiries story date: 21/05/2001

Chhokar family to deliver damning assessment story date: 21/05/2001

Scottish Parliament to investigate work of Crown Office story date: 08/05/2001

Scots police 'branded institutionally racist' story date: 06/05/2001

Murdered waiter's family demands independent investigation story date: 16/02/2001

Murdered man's family call for public inquiry story date: 16/02/2001

Man found guilty of contempt over Chhokar evidence story date: 23/01/2001

Hundreds attend Chhokar rally story date: 13/01/2001

Murdered waiter's family call for public inquiry story date: 19/12/2000

Chhokar family call for independent inquiry story date: 11/12/2000

By Terri Judd

Herald 18th May 2001 Chhokars call for inquiry boycott

Independent: 23 January 2001 The unpleasant stench of racism By Deborah Orr

'These cases suggest the problems of institutional racism uncovered by the Macpherson report have not been dealt with at all'

Herald 18th May 2001
Chhokars call for inquiry boycott

Independent: 23 January 2001
The unpleasant stench of racism

By Deborah Orr