Letter to Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, Hon. Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State - Judiciary Republicans Demand Answers From State, DHS And FBI On Terrorist Who Attacked Texas Synagogue

Letter

Dear Secretaries Blinken and Mayorkas:
We are writing to request information about the case of Malik Faisal Akram, a British
national who held four people hostage at the Beth Israel Congregation in Colleyville, Texas, for
hours on January 15th, and was killed by FBI agents after the hostages escaped.

Akram was reportedly demanding the release of Dr. Aaifa Siddiqui, a Pakistani national currently serving an 86-year sentence at a prison in Texas for attempted murder and armed assault on U.S.
officers in Afghanistan in 2010. Akram reportedly arrived in the United States legally in December 2021.

Regarding this entry, law enforcement sources have said:

Akram was not on a U.S. government watchlist;

British intelligence officials have advised their U.S. counterparts that a preliminary
review of their databases similarly show no derogatory information about Akram;

and Akram apparently traveled to the United States under the terms of the United
Kingdom's membership in the U.S. Visa Waiver Program.

And yet, Akram's brother in the United Kingdom told reporters that Akram "had been
known to the counterterrorism police in Britain." Though the Greater Manchester Police Department and the United Kingdom's counterterrorism division declined to comment on that assertion, a British security source told reporters on January 18th that Akram was indeed known to U.K. intelligence.
NBC News reports that Akram "was the subject of a short, low-level investigation by the U.K.'s MI5 domestic intelligence agency in the second half of 2020." The investigation was "based on information that he may have been involved in Islamist terrorism." According to NBC News, "[w]hen there was no indication of a terrorist threat, … Akram joined approximately 40,000 other closed "subjects of interest' in Britain who have been investigated
but not found to be plotting terrorist attacks."

In addition to being the subject of a security investigation, Akram also reportedly
had a criminal record. According to Akram's brother, Akram was arrested in the 1990s when
he was 19 and sent to a young offenders' institute, and was later sentenced to six months in
prison for "violent disorder" for wielding a baseball bat during a family feud with his cousins.
Akram also apparently had mental health issues that, if true, would potentially have made Akram inadmissible to the United States. Akram's brother in the United Kingdom
told reporters that Akram was "a deeply troubled man" and added: "It's well known,
everybody in the town knows, he has mental health issues."

In light of the numerous red flags in Akram's record, we are extremely concerned about
the adequacy of our visa adjudication and admission screening protocols. As Akram's own
brother told reporters: "How had he gotten into America? … Why was he granted a visa? How
did he land at J.F.K. airport and not get stopped for one second?"

In order to more fully understand how Malik Faisal Akram entered this country, and what
possible breakdowns in our screening processes allowed that to happen, we would appreciate
answers to the following questions and requests no later than February 8, 2022:

1. Please send a copy of the "A-file" for Malik Faisal Akram.

2. If not included in the A-file, please send a copy of any Form I-94 or ESTA application
completed by Mr. Akram.

3. Please list all U.S. nonimmigrant or immigrant visas possessed at any time by Mr.
Akram, including their validity dates and the places where they were issued, and supply
copies of the visa application forms submitted by Mr. Akram for such visas, as well as
any applications that were denied.

4. On what date was Mr. Akram most recently admitted to the United States?

5. On the date of Mr. Akram's most recent admission to the United States, was he admitted
under the Visa Waiver Program or as an alien in possession of a valid nonimmigrant visa? If admitted pursuant to a nonimmigrant visa, in what status was he admitted and
for what period? Was he ever granted a waiver of inadmissibility? Please explain

6. In October 2021, the Congressional Research Service stated in a report on the Visa
Waiver Program (VWP) that "some observers of the [VWP] have raised concerns about
the possibility that terrorists will enter the United States under the VWP because those
entering under the VWP undergo a biographic, rather than a biometric (i.e., fingerprint
and digital photograph), security screening and do not need to interview in person with a
U.S. consular official before embarking for the United States." Please specify which
criminal or security databases are not checked for VWP travelers as part of the ESTA
process, but which are checked for aliens applying for a nonimmigrant visa at a U.S.
consulate?

7. Under the statute creating the VWP, a country designated as a VWP program country
must enter into and fully implement "an agreement with the United States to share
information regarding whether nationals of that country traveling to the United States
represent a threat to the security or welfare of the United States or its citizens."15

a. Assuming such an agreement exists with the United Kingdom, does the agreement
require the United Kingdom to share with the United States the identities of persons
on whom MI5 has opened an investigation? If not, why not?

b. Does the agreement require the United Kingdom to share with the United States the
identities of persons on the U.K. "Subjects of Interest" list? If not, why not?

c. Has the United Kingdom, pursuant to such agreement, ever shared with the United
States the identities of persons on whom MI5 has opened an investigation?

d. Has the United Kingdom, pursuant to such agreement, ever shared with the United
States the identities of persons on the U.K. "Subjects of Interest" list?

e. Did the United Kingdom share information with the United States about the
investigation on Mr. Akram or his placement on the "Subjects of Interest" list, and if
so, was that information made available to DHS or State Department officials
adjudicating Mr. Akram's ESTA application or application for admission?

8. Would the fact that Mr. Akram had been investigated by MI5 and subsequently placed on
the "Subjects of Interest" list, had it been known by your Departments (assuming it
wasn't known), have resulted in the denial of Mr. Akram's ESTA application or
admission to the United States?

9. It is our understanding that, since the time of the Christmas 2009 Abdulmuttalab bombing
attempt, DHS has opened a Visa Security Unit (VSU) at the U.S. Embassy in London.

a. Is the VSU at the U.S. Embassy in London still in operation?

b. Was the VSU aware of the MI5 investigation into Mr. Akram or his placement on the
"Subjects of Interest" list?

c. Is the VSU generally made aware of the subjects of MI5 investigations or of the
identities of persons on the U.K. "Subjects of Interest" list?

10. As discussed above, according to Mr. Akram's brother, Akram was arrested in the
1990s when he was 19 and sent to a young offenders' institute, and was later sentenced to six months in prison for "violent disorder" for wielding a baseball bat during a family
feud with his cousins.

a. Were either of your Departments aware of such criminal history by Mr. Akram at the
time of his ESTA, visa, or admission application?

b. Are such criminal offenses required to be shared by the United Kingdom pursuant to
the agreement referenced in Section 217(c)(2)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act?

Should you have questions, please contact Drew Robinson of Ranking Member
Grassley's staff at 202-224-5225. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,

Source