Ministers are seeking to block intelligence material from being heard at an inquest into the death of two men killed in the 2025 Manchester synagogue attack. Lawyers for Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, told a coroner on Thursday that disclosing the MI5 files would pose a serious risk to national security. Melvin Cravitz, 66, died as a result of multiple knife wounds inflicted by the attacker, Jihad al-Shamie.
Adrian Daulby, 53, was killed by a single police gunshot wound as he held the building’s doors shut against the terrorist. A senior coroner is due to examine the deaths of the two men at the Heaton Park Hebrew synagogue on 2 October last year during Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. The full inquest will focus on al-Shamie’s background, as well as what the state knew about him before the attack.
It will also examine security at the synagogue, the role of the state in assessing the risks to the Jewish community in Greater Manchester, and the response to the attack. Mahmood told the Commons on 13 October that al-Shamie was “never referred to the Prevent programme, nor was he known to counter-terrorism policing or the security services”. At a pre-inquest review on Thursday, barristers for the families of Cravitz and Daulby said they were concerned that the emergence of MI5 material “may contradict” that statement.
Anna Morris KC, representing Daulby’s family, said there had been a “demonstrable lack of candour” by the security services in other proceedings, including the inquiry into the Manchester Arena attack. She said Daulby’s family were “concerned that this application [by the Home Office] and the information behind it may contradict statements made public by security services and counter-terrorism police that the suspect was not known to counter-terrorism police”. The deaths of Daulby and Cravitz are being examined by Alexia Durran, the chief coroner of England and Wales, at Manchester coroner’s court.
Edward Pleeth, counsel to the inquest, told the hearing the government was seeking to withhold “potentially relevant security sensitive material held by MI5” and “potentially relevant security sensitive material held by counter-terrorism police”. Pleeth said this unspecified material was judged by the government to “cause serious harm to national security” if it was disclosed publicly. He said the inquest legal team was satisfied that the information was so sensitive it could not be aired even in a redacted form.
There was “no adequate alternative to complete non-disclosure”, Pleeth said, describing the concerns about its disclosure as “well-evidenced”. Durran is now considering whether to ask the government to convert the inquest into a statutory public inquiry to allow the MI5 material to be heard in private. Unlike public inquiries, coroner’s inquests cannot legally consider evidence given in secret hearings.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
