Ali Has

Ali Has is the founding principal of Morgan Has Solicitors. Ali is a member of London Criminal Court Solicitors Association, Criminal Law Solicitors Association and the Duty Solicitors Panel. His main area of expertise lies in the Criminal Justice System. He has a vast amount of experience in dealing with Criminal Defence Litigation and Advocacy. His caseload ranges from defending people accused of the very serious offences of terrorism, murder, robbery, wounding, firearms, drugs related offences, kidnapping, sexual offences and conspiracies involving multiple defendants to the less serious but equally important, road traffic and other petty offences.

Ali’s Advocacy experience ranges from his years of providing advice to suspects detained at police stations to representing clients at Magistrates Courts throughout London and its bordering Boroughs. Ali was appointed as a Higher Courts Advocate in 2008 and has since been able to undertake Advocacy in the Higher Courts as a Solicitor-Advocate. Ali particularly enjoys complex trials involving a multitude of issues. To this end, Ali is renowned as a bright trial advocate by his peers.
Ancillary to his Criminal Defence Practice, Ali also undertakes appellant work involving applications to the Crown Court, Court of Appeal the Criminal Cases Review Commission as well as Civil Appeals in, for instance, Welfare Benefits cases.

Other areas of Ali’s expertise outside of Criminal Law include Regulatory Law, such as Licensing, Planning and Health and Safety Regulations. Ali also has experience in pursuing and defending clients in civil actions. 

Over the years since his practice as a Lawyer, Ali has developed a keen interest in Human Rights issues; and in particular how wider communities are affected by the implications of Anti-Terror Legislation and the Criminal Law generally. To this end, Ali regularly attends fact finding missions and observes “show trials” and talks on panels and seminars on Human Rights and related issues. Ali’s interest in Human Rights issues has gained him a reputation for defending protest cases, terrorism allegations and cases with a political angle including, politically motivated extradition requests.

NOTABLE CASES

R v Garip and others (2005)
This was a multi-handed people smuggling case involving the largest investigation into human trafficking ever conducted by the National Crime Squad. In this case, Ali worked alongside a colleague in preparing the defence of one of the defendants. Having carefully read through the boxes of evidence presented which involved telephone intercept evidence, and carefully considered the strength of the case; the defendant was advised to plead guilty, on an agreed basis and having received an indication as to sentence. He received a substantially reduced sentence compared to the other defendants who contested the trial.

R v Dincle and others (2006)
This was a multi-handed allegation of conspiracy to rape and rob the occupants of a brothel in North London. Ali was instructed to act as the solicitor for one the defendants. The case presented evidence of a complex forensic nature, requiring apt knowledge of the issues raised and cautious preparation. The case was eventually dismissed and the defendants were acquitted of the charges. 

R v Yildiz (2007)
This was a 4-week two-handed murder trial of a father and his 16-year-old son. The victim, a 41-year-old car mechanic, had been stabbed to death in broad daylight at his place of work. Ali was instructed to act for the father who spoke no English. After a lengthy trial the father was acquitted and the son convicted of murder. Given the nature of the relationship between the two defendants and the number of child witnesses who had to be cross examined, the case called for delicate and difficult judgments and careful preparation.

R v D (2008)
Ali was instructed in this case which involved an allegation of anal rape of a 4-year-old girl by a 12-year-old defendant, involving complicated expert medical evidence and calling for highly sensitive cross-examination, which in turn required detailed and careful case preparation. Due to the age of the defendant, every effort was made to take him through the evidence in a careful, logical, and in a manner which was not overly perplexing for him.

R v Denton and others (2008)
This was an allegation of gang rape of a 14 year of girl by 9 defendants. Ali was instructed to act for the “ringleader”. The case involved thousands of pages of evidence, which presented a multitude of complex issues for the defendants. For this reason the case required exceptionally careful preparation.

R v Burak and another (2009)
Ali was instructed in this two handed murder case, which involved the death of a customer at a restaurant in Weston Super Mare. The victim had been struck several times with a blunt instrument around his head and body which was said to have caused his death. The case presented complex medical and pathological expert evidence. After careful preparation and consideration of the evidence involved, the defendant was successfully defended and acquitted of murder. 

R v Tasci and others (2009)
Ali was instructed in this multi-handed human trafficking conspiracy, with an international dimension involving evidence from many countries including France and Belgium. The case was a very high cost case (VHCC) and involved thousands of pages of evidence, on which Ali worked to prepare his clients defence. The case was eventually disposed of with Ali’s client the only defendant to receive a sentence of 6 months’ imprisonment. The remaining defendants received sentences that ranged from 6 to 14 years’ imprisonment. 

R v Sahut and another (2009)
This was a conspiracy to supply class A drugs and money laundering. The case involved two defendants and Ali was instructed by the leading defendant; against whom there was complex documentary, and surveillance to suggest that both defendants had arrived from mainland Europe; with the sole purpose of setting up a network for the supply of drugs, and money laundering through the guise of legitimate companies. After careful preparation, the defendants were acquitted of all charges and all of the monies seized from them as part of the investigation were returned. 

R v Karakus (2011)
This was an attempted murder allegation. It was said that the defendant had performed a revenge attack on the alleged victim; who had set alight to the defendants flat whilst his wife and children were at home. The alleged victim had been stabbed 5 times to his abdomen and buttocks. Having carefully considered the evidence and prepared the case, the defendant was found not guilty of the alleged offence of attempted murder. 

UKBA v Asam (2012)
This was a money laundering allegation. It was said that the defendant had been attempting to conceal criminal proceeds of crime by diverting cash sums to Turkey, and thereby laundering the same as earned cash. After a successful defence, the defendant was repaid the monies seized from him in full and cleared of all allegations. 

UKBA v Tuncel and another (2012)
This was an allegation of money laundering. It was said that the defendant had been concealing cash income from his various business interests, and attempting to legitimise the same through diversion of large cash sums to foreign countries. The case was successfully defendant, and ended as a legal presented having been appealed to the Court of Appeal on a question of law. It is now a leading authority. 

UKBA v Yeni Ozgur Politika (2013)
Ali was instructed in this case to defend a Newspaper published in Germany and distributed around the UK as well as the rest of Europe. The main focus of the paper is Kurdish Human Rights issues within Turkey, and the reporting of the same. The allegation against the Newspaper was that it was a guise to collect and launder money designated for Terrorist purposes, namely the PKK, a proscribed “terror” organization. After successfully defending the case, the Newspaper was cleared of all allegations and all of its funds were reinstated to it. The case involved serious and compelling Human Rights arguments. 

Charity Proceedings against London Alevi Association and Cem Evi (2013)
Ali was instructed in this case to defend 16 charity trustees against whom charity proceedings had been initiated in the High Court. The allegations were that they had conspired to take over the London Alevi Association and Cem Evi by force. The defendants whom Ali was instructed to defend, were in fact representing a varying pleural conception of the Alevi faith which was at odds with that of the Turkey’s conceptualisation of the faith that had the ultimate aim of assimilating the followers of the Alevi faith into Islam, and Turkish nationalism. After years of dedicated and careful preparation, Ali managed to successfully defend all 16 defendants and ensured their positions at the Charity were reinstated with immediate effect. The results of the case have since had a profound effect within the Alevi community both in the UK, Europe and Turkey. The success of the case has also seen the significant development of the faith and its various institutions both in the UK, Europe and Turkey. As part of the defence, compelling arguments based on Human Rights and Historical Assimilation Policies by Turkey were explored and advanced. 

R v Male and others (2014)
This was a major conspiracy to import and supply 48 kilos of heroin from Cyprus via mainland Europe into and around the UK. The case involved 6 defendants. The case was prosecuted by New Scotland Yard, and involved complex telephone intercept evidence and surveillance conducted over several months. Save for Ali’s client, all of the remaining defendants were found guilty of the charges and sentenced to substantial terms of imprisonment.

R v Ebadi and another (2014)
This was a conspiracy to supply 35 kilos of heroin. Ali was instructed to act leading defendant. After careful consideration of the evidence and advice, the defendant was sentenced to only 5 years imprisonment. One of the lowest sentences for such offences recorded.

R v Baybasin and others (2015)
This was a six handed conspiracy to kidnap, cause GBH and blackmail. Ali was instructed by the leading defendant and four others in the case. The case was prosecuted by the National Crime Agency, and involved years of telephone intercept evidence, surveillance and an operation involving over 200 police offices. After months of careful preparation, all of Ali’s clients were acquitted of all charges and released from custody with immediate effect. The remaining defendant whom was not represented by Ali had been advised to plead guilty by his legal team, and received a substantial term of imprisonment. Due to the profile of Ali’s lead client, the case involved one of the most challenging tactical decisions making processes, and required a keen eye for detail.

R v Ulus and another (2015)
This case involved one of the most challenging pieces of evidence in which to run a successful defence of ‘pre-emptive’ self defence. The evidence was very clear CCTV footage in which the defendant was seen to assault the alleged victim without provocation. After careful consideration of the case and facts, ‘pre-emptive’ self defence was successfully argued leading to the defendant being acquitted of all charges.

R v Ozcelik (2015)
Ali was instructed to defend this case, which was the first ever case (in the UK) in which a prosecution was brought against a person attempting to join the PKK, a proscribed “Terrorist” organization. The case was prosecuted by the Anti-Terrorism command at New Scotland Yard. The allegation was that the defendant had taken preparatory steps to join the PKK. The case involved a multitude of evidence, from various European countries, and arguments surrounding Human Rights issues relating to the historical suppression of the Kurdish people within Turkey, and their liberation movement both within Turkey and Syria alike. The case now stands as authority, and has been reported as a precedent case on the lowest sentence rage to be given in cases involving facts presented within it. The case required careful and delicate preparation in light of the sensitive nature of the issues involved, and required highly tactical advice. As part of the preparation process, Ali also visited countries such as Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands in order to gather relevant evidence on behalf of his client. 

R v Paskaradas (2015)
This was a 40 million pound money lauding case involving 17 defendants. Ali was instructed in the case along with his colleague Guven Ates. The case was prosecuted by the National Crime Agency (NCA) and involved years of surveillance, forensic accounting evidence, banking records, complex telephone data and schedules, and a multitude of witness evidence all of which amounted to 29 thousand pages of evidence. After carefully preparing the case, and legal arguments as to shortfalls of the prosecution case; the case was dismissed after four weeks of legal arguments. This was one of the rare cases in which the learned Judge commented that the NCA was “not fit for purpose”. 

R v Rodolfus and another (2016)
This case involved an indictment containing 15 counts of handing stolen goods and money laundering of a very high value. Ali was instructed to defend the leading defendant. The case was prosecuted by New Scotland Yard’s fraud division, and involved years of surveillance evidence spanning around various European countries, and involving a multitude of well-known companies such as Tesco’s and Asda etc. In light of the defendant’s problematic personal circumstances, the case presented difficulties that required careful consideration and tactical advice. Having successfully defended the case, the defendant was cleared of all charges against him and acquitted.

R v Erbil and others (2016)
Ali was instructed in this case to defend all 6 defendants. The case centered around allegations of assault and affray. All of the defendants were prominent members of the London Alevi Association and Cem Evi, and the UK Alevi Federation. It was successfully argued that the alleged victims had fabricated evidence in order to blame the defendants with a view to criminalize, and discredit their successful work within the said Alevi institutions. A subtle argument in the case was that, the Turkish state had encouraged false religious figureheads in order to divert the Alevi community within Turkey and Europe from mainstream Alevisim. The allegations were politically motivated for this reason. After successful legal arguments over five days, the case was eventually dismissed against 5 defendants, and the remaining 1 defendant was found not guilty of all charges by a panel of jurors. All of the defendants were therefore acquitted of all charges.

CURRENT CASES

R v Evans and others (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this major boiler room fraud involving 18 defendants. The case is being prosecuted by the fraud division of the City of London Police. The case involves complex evidential issues and consists of over 20 thousand pages of evidence. Ali is currently preparing the case for trial which is due to be heard later this year. 

R v Evans and others (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this major land fraud involving 16 defendants. The case is being prosecuted by the fraud division of the City of London Police. The case involves complex evidential issues and consists of over 20 thousand pages of evidence, and Ali is currently working through the evidence in preparation for the trial listed for 2017.

R v Mahmod (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this appeal against a multi-handed “honor killing” murder case. The case involves complex legal and factual research, and dating back to 2006. 

R v Gjykokaj (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this appeal against a murder case. The case involves complex legal and factual research. The allegation is that the defendant assassinated the victim as a premeditated targeted hit.

R v Ozcan and others (2016)
Ali is currently representing a young 18-year-old defendant in this attempted murder allegation involving multiple defendants. The allegations are that the defendants stabbed the victim as part of a joint enterprise, and with the intention of killing him. 

R v Osadebay and others (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this 4 handed murder case by the leading defendant. The case involves thousands of pages of complex telephone, cell site, and social media evidence. 

R v Deniz and others (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this 4 handed conspiracy to supply heroin. The case involves months of surveillance evidence, and complex schedules of telephone data and evidence. Careful considering and preparation is particularly required in this case due to the “cut throat” nature of the defence being advanced.

Republic of Turkey v Karatepe (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this extradition request by Turkey of a prominent member of the leftist socialist organization known as MLKP (Marxist Leninist Communist Party), for alleged crimes dating back to the early 1990’s. The defendant was systematically tortured in police custody and all of the evidence obtained is said to be fabricated testimony from police offices. The defendant was tried by the then Turkish State Security Court system known as DGM’s and which were subsequently abolished for their inability to uphold fair trials and human rights norms. The case involves a multitude of Human Rights arguments and issues surrounding articles: 2 (Right to Life), 3 (Prohibition of Torture), 6 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 8 (Right to Respect for Private and Family Life) of the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as abuse arguments surrounding political refugee status and the protections of the UN Geneva Convention on the protection of political refugees. This case is politically motivated, and involves the examination of decades of policy imposed by Turkey on leftist, socialist and Kurdish people to systematically persecute them for their antiestablishment political opinions. 

Republic of Turkey v Denli (2016)
Ali is currently instructed in this extradition request by Turkey of a prominent member of the leftist socialist organization known as MLKP (Marxist Leninist Communist Party) for alleged crimes dating back to the early 1990’s. The defendant was tried by the then Turkish State Security Court (DGM) after he had been systematically tortured whilst in police custody and during his remand in prison. The defendant was sentenced to death which was reduced to life imprisonment. The case involves a multitude of Human Rights arguments and issues surrounding articles: 2 (Right to Life), 3 (Prohibition of Torture), 6 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 8 (Right to Respect for Private and Family Life) of the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as abuse arguments surrounding political refugee status and the protections of the UN Geneva Convention on the protection of political refugees. This case is politically motivated and involves the examination of decades of policy imposed by Turkey on leftist, socialist and Kurdish people to systematically persecute them for their antiestablishment political opinions.