Tuesday has been a curious day for the UK’s secret torture state, it began unpromisingly for the razor to genitals loving torturers but has ended with victory snatched from the jaws of defeat, so come with me now…
Last week ended with the High Court ordering the release of the interrogation guidelines that New Labour (and current Leadership frontrunner David Miliband) had in place with the SIS (MI5, MI6 and the rest…). So, take it away Mr Justice Silber-
MI5 and MI6 have been ordered by a High Court judge to release secret guidelines which human rights groups claim instructed spies to turn a blind eye to the torture of British terror suspects abroad. The guidelines will be released to six British former Guantanamo Bay detainees who are suing the Government for allegedly being complicit in their torture by the Americans. The guidelines were issued to agents in 2002 and 2004.
On Monday with this ruling hanging over the ConDems another case where Reprieve had challenged the guidelines was resolved very sneakily, they tell the court they are issuing new guidelines so the High Court ruled the issue of the old ones as moot (fall for that and check out my ebay page for the Tower of London)-
The British government promised Monday to quickly issue its spies a fresh set of guidelines on how to avoid being complicit in torture.
The announcement addresses a legal challenge to the existing guidelines, which human rights group Reprieve said allowed British intelligence agents to gather information extracted through torture — even if they weren’t directly involved in the mistreatment.
The group had sued the government in an effort to overturn the current rules, claiming there was compelling evidence to show that the U.K. had been ”reaping the fruits” of torture since at least 2002.
But the High Court in London ruled that the issue was moot as new guidelines were in the works.
James Eadie QC — acting for David Cameron, the Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Defence Secretary and the Attorney General — said there was “no credible evidence” that there had been any complicity in torture by UK agents.
He told Mr Justice Collins, sitting in London, there would be fresh guidance published “very shortly”, making any legal challenge unnecessary.
So up rolls Tuesday, they are still supposed to release the old/existing guidelines but have avoided Reprieve’s challenge with their new guidelines ploy pending appeal, not to mention HRW’s new report-
Reprieve is considering whether to appeal against that decision, arguing that it exposes detainees to continuing mistreatment.
Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch publishes a report today that points to the “embarrassing and possibly illegal contents” of that secret policy. The New York-based group adds that although the UK has claimed the eradication of torture to be a foreign policy goal, it has “pursued a series of counterterrorism policies that undermine the absolute prohibition on torture”. The complicity of UK agents in torture in Pakistan, in particular, it says, “sends a clear message to the authorities in Pakistan that the UK is indifferent about the torture of terrorism suspects in its custody”.
And…the old/existing guidelines have still not been released, so what does a government do when faced with-
- Lots of evidence in the public domain of wrongdoing and increasing volume of demands for redress and justice.
- The bulk of that can be put at the door of the previous government aka your political opposition.
Ta-da! It’s inquiry time! And let’s have a look at the wonderful inquiry standard operating procedures they hope to get away with (cue music as the conveyor belt of establishment whitewash trundles the shining prizes past us), oh yes and not forgetting first we checked it was all ok with Washington (no possible conflicts there… Obama’s Moral Bankruptcy Regarding Torture, oh)
Cameron is understood to have discussed the issue in recent days with President Obama, but no decision is expected very shortly.
Hague first spoke of the need for a judge-led inquiry after the coalition agreement, but his remarks appeared to unsettle the intelligence services and required further discussion on Cameron’s national security inquiry.
The inquiry is expected to offer compensation in cases, where necessary, and is likely to be held in private.
Complex issues such as perjury, the publication of evidence and whether those seeking compensation would be required to drop all other claims will need to be agreed.
There were reports at the weekend, sourced to the Foreign Office, suggesting that the inquiry would examine only one case – that of Binyam Mohamed – and that Cameron had already concluded that the country’s intelligence agencies were guilty only of errors of omission, not commission.
Now the key thing here is- they hope to get away with- this is only an announcement and the details are yet to be fully set forth so Cameron’s verdict before they begin ‘guilty only of errors of omission, not commission’ does not have to be how this plays out, already MP’s and human rights groups are insisting it be independent and public. That campaign will grow in the coming days and weeks. That will be important otherwise I dare to predict what will happen- At worst a bad apple may be found, Cameron’s pre inquiry verdict will become the official verdict, the Tories will use this to attack their political opposition but will not drag the SIS into court, well sitting governments just don’t do that if they know what’s good for them. That does lead to the interesting behaviour of New Labour, for a long time (especially but not limited to the Cold War) the SIS spied on and engaged in operations against the Labour party. Then New Labour came along with its move to the right, once in power and once the war-on-terror ™ era meant the intelligence co-operation with the US meant torture co-operation they set to covering up and obfuscation like any good authoritarian government would do for its torturing intelligence arm (obviously not new, power always means the sitting governments are enmeshed in abuses, but the Bush regime was extreme in its torture yet NL did not fight it). Thus the enquiry could well be used to -rightfully- expose New Labour and leadership candidate David Miliband’s role in torture but not to hold the SIS to account as the ConDems have to work with them and it’s awfully, frightfully rude to be prosecuting your work colleagues (and probable school chums and perhaps in one case a sitting Tory MP) for torture. Furthermore where the inquiry might reveal evidence of US torture I expect the ConDems to be no less conspiratorial with Washington than New Labour to keep things ‘civilised’ for the war criminals in power. Apologies will be made and compensation paid to survivors in the hope that will end the affair (we will never hear about those who did not survive, who were tortured to death) if the usual establishment pantomime is allowed to happen again. However we will still be bound into our intelligence agreement with the US, the US is still using torture and thus at best we will be an accessory, a market for torture derived product (worthless as real intel but valuable to support the fantasies of war pimps and bigots). So an inquiry with actual teeth that gets actual results is imperative and that does not hide the collusion with the White House as that will provide better leverage for human rights to be enforced in the US, Reprieve already have (polite) proposals for how that might be achieved-
Read the rest of this entry »
