Published on 6/21/2026
Businessman Shams Sadiq did not expect that his return would turn from a short vacation into the beginning of a long confrontation with the British authorities.
When he arrived at Manchester Airport in northern England at dawn on May 11, 2026, he was waiting to complete entry procedures and return to his usual life, but what happened later put him through a series of security measures that ended, according to his account, with an attempt to attract him to work as a source of information for the police.
Sadiq, 51 years old, says that he was stopped at the passport control department upon his arrival, and asked to wait for a security interview, before being subjected to procedures under “Schedule 7” of the British Terrorism Act, which are powers that give the authorities the ability to stop, question, and search travelers at airports and border crossings even without clear suspicion of a violation.
According to his account, the businessman was taken to an investigation room, where two plainclothes officers confiscated his electronic devices and luggage, and asked him to provide the passwords for his phone and accounts, in addition to answering a long series of questions that were not limited to the details of his travel, but rather extended to his personal life, relationships, and daily activity.
Sadiq says that the investigation lasted more than three hours, during which the conversation focused on the nature of his social relationships, the mosque he frequents, and whether he knows people who hold extremist ideas or how he would behave if he encountered such cases.
A few days after his arrest, he received a call to retrieve his devices. In a cafe inside Manchester Airport, he met the two officers who returned his belongings to him and apologized for what happened, before asking him to sign papers confirming his receipt of the property.
Palestine Action
But the case did not end there, as Sadiq says that there was another development that began a few days before that, when the police contacted his lawyer about other devices that had been confiscated from him in October 2025, against the backdrop of a previous arrest, and his case was later closed without charges being brought.
On May 15, while he was at Ashton Police Station to receive those devices, Sadiq says officers informed him that they had reviewed their contents, including messages and videos, and that they believed he was linked to the Palestine Action group.
He adds that the biggest surprise came when the officers asked him to cooperate with them, stressing their need to “help” him, while talking about the possibility of him receiving financial compensation, as well as overlooking some minor violations if he agreed to work with them.
Sadiq narrates that the offer surprised him, especially since he was not facing existing charges, and that the previous case for which he was arrested had been closed. He commented on the matter by saying that he had imagined the idea of the “secret agent” as it appears in the movies, but he discovered that the reality was completely different, and so he rejected the offer.
After his refusal, Sadiq turned to his legal team, who advised him to reveal what happened to public opinion, considering that announcing the case might provide him with greater protection, at a time when lawyers began taking official steps by filing complaints and addressing various security agencies, including the police and the anti-terrorism police.
The legal team is currently focusing on finding out who decided to arrest him, the circumstances that led to his interrogation, and who is behind the attempt to recruit him to work as a source of information.
Shams Sadiq’s story reopens the debate in Britain about the limits of the use of “Schedule 7” of the Terrorism Act, and the extent of the breadth of powers that these measures grant to the security authorities, especially in cases where there are no clear accusations. While Sadiq says that he hopes that others who have gone through similar experiences will speak up, stressing: “I am certainly not the only person to whom this happened.”
