Naeem Mian QC

Naeem Mian QC

"A skilled advocate and trial strategist."

Legal 500 2017
Year of call: 2002 QC: 2017
For enquiries please call: 020 7353 5324 or email vcard cv save

Criminal Defence


Naeem is one of the foremost lawyers specialising in defending suspects charged with terrorism offences. Having acted in over 25 major high profile terrorism cases to date, his experience and success in this field is second to none.

Notably, as leading counsel he secured the acquittal of his client in the first case to be heard in the UK courts concerning the funding of terrorism in Syria (R v Msaad, 2014). He defended in the first terrorism related trial to be held largely in ‘secret’ (R v Incidal & Rarmoul-Bouhadjar, 2014-15), and secured acquittals in the second ever prosecution for breach of a Control Order (R v CD, 2011); as well as the acquittal of his client charged with involvement in the 7/7 tube bombing, the most serious terrorism incident in the UK resulting in the deaths of 52 people (R v Saleem & Others).

Naeem is usually instructed at a very early stage from resisting applications for warrants of further detention, through every stage of the case to its conclusion at trial. He has a wealth of experience in dealing with the multiple legal, evidential and factual complexities that arise in such cases. From dealing with ‘mindset’ material, highly sensitive and secret material, and complex disclosure issues; through to conducting the cross-examination of scientific experts and Security Service witnesses. In addition, his involvement in representing clients in IRA related terrorism cases prior to coming to the Bar add to his wealth of experience.

National Security, Control Orders & TPIMS

Naeem is one of the handful of counsel who act for individuals subject to Control Orders under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, and later TPIMs under the Terrorism Prevention And Investigation Measures Act 2011.

These cases involve individuals who are not charged with any specific offence but whom the Home Secretary considers to have been involved in terrorism or terrorism related activities. Heard exclusively before judges of the High Court at the RCJ, they involve the extensive use of secret or closed evidence by the Home Secretary and are a hybrid of both civil and criminal procedure. They invariably require extensive cross-examination of security service personnel and complex written submissions.


R v Z (2015)

Allegation of being concerned in the preparation of a terrorist attack. Allegation is that the defendant was planning to attack a member of the armed forced at an army barracks in the UK.

R v S (2015)

Allegation that the defendant was travelling to Syria in order to fight with IS.

R-v-S & Others (2014)

Allegation that the defendant and others were travelling to Syria to commit acts of terrorism.

R-v-M & Others (2014)

Allegation of being engaged in terrorist funding. The defendant was a British student studying at University. She was stopped at Heathrow with €20 000 in her underwear which was allegedly destined for terrorists fighting in Syria.

R-v-AB & CD (2014)

Unprecedented terrorism trial held mostly in secret. Involved appeal by the press to the Court of Appeal.

R-v-A & A (2014)

Multiple allegations of offences contrary to section 58 and conspiracy to attend a training camp. Defendants were two young brothers whom the Crown accepted had been ‘groomed’ and radicalised by their older brother in law. Case involved extensive use of surveillance evidence.

R-v-AA (2014)

Multiple allegations contrary to section 58. Case concerned the Defendant being a member of a proscribed organisation and possessing material likely to be of use to a terrorist.

R-v-B (2014)

Multiple allegations of inciting terrorism overseas and ‘glorifying terrorism’. The case involved extensive use of media including Facebook and focused on glorification of the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby.

R-v-A & Others (2013)

Allegations of planning a terrorist attack and conspiracy to attend a training camp. The defendant was an ex-special constable. Case involved extensive surveillance evidence.

R-v-K & Another (2012)

Husband and wife alleged to have been planning a terrorist attack in the North of England.

R-v-A & Others

Allegations of being engaged in terrorist funding. The defendants were alleged to have been involved in funding their brother and others who were alleged to have been fighting with Al Shabab in Somalia.

R-v-CD (2010-2012)

Control Order/TPIM -High Court

Allegation of involvement in an attempt to launch ‘Mumbai style’ attack in UK. Involved use of secret evidence.

R-v-K & K (2011)

Allegations of preparing for acts of terrorism and possessing terrorism related material. The prosecution sought to prove a ‘terrorist mind-set’ by relying on a vast amount of literature and other material found in the possession of the defendants. Coupled with extensive probe material, the prosecution alleged that the defendants were in the early stages of planning a terrorist attack.

R-v-CD (2011)

Allegation of breaching a Control Order. In only the second contested prosecution of its type ever to be brought, the defendant was charged with 15 counts of breaching a Control Order contrary to the PTA 2005. An Old Bailey jury unanimously acquitted the defendant on counts 1 and 2. They were unable to reach verdicts on the remaining 13 counts and were discharged. The prosecution chose not to seek a re-trial on the 13 counts.

R-v-BG (2009-2011)

Control Order/TPIM

Alleged attendance at terrorist training camp.

R-v-S & Others (2008) , Retrial (2009)

The defendant’s were jointly charged with Conspiracy to Cause Explosions With Intent To Endanger Life (the 7/7 bombings of the London transport system which resulted in the deaths of 52 people – Operation Theseus). The jury having been unable to reach a verdict in 2008, at the retrial in 2009, ‘S’ was acquitted.

R-v-A & Others

Allegations of preparing for terrorist attacks contrary to section 5. The case involved a number of individuals allegedly planning a terrorist attack on the UK mainland. Whilst the specific target had yet to be identified, the level of preparation was well advanced. The case involved extensive use of evidence from the security services.

R-v-M & Others (2008)

Allegations of possessing terrorist related material. The defendant had what amounted to a library of prohibited material including various editions of Inspire Magazine and lectures from a variety of extremist ideologues.

R-v-K & Others

Allegations of being engaged in fundraising for a terrorist purpose. The case against the defendants involved fund raising for individuals allegedly involved in terrorist acts in the Middle East. The case relied on the extensive use of surveillance and banking evidence.

R-v-K & Others

Allegations of inciting terrorism overseas. The defendant was alleged to have been involved in inciting individuals from the UK to join ‘jihad’ in Iraq. The case involved the extensive use of Facebook and other social media.

R-v-H & Others (2008)

Multiple allegations of being engaged in fundraising for a terrorist purpose. The defendants were alleged to be members of a proscribed organisation. The case involved the extensive use of ‘mind-set’ evidence illustrated by reference to publications and other media.

R v O & Others

Murder of a car driver in rush hour traffic. The case involved multiple young defendants allegedly linked to a gang based in the Hackney area of London who mistakenly identified the victim as a rival. The case involved the extensive use of cell site and forensic evidence.

R v R & Others

Revenge murder with gang related background. The case arose out of a long running feud between rival gangs involved in drug dealing and engaged in a ‘turf war’.

portfoloo Barrister Portfolio [10]
Barrister Portfolio close
Barrister Call CV Email

Remove All

Click here to email this list of barrister to a colleague.