Government loses torture appeal

#1
"Binyam Mohamed torture appeal lost by UK government

Binyam Mohamed has been involved in a lengthy legal battle
The foreign secretary has lost an Appeal Court bid to stop the disclosure of secret information relating to the alleged torture of a UK resident.

Ethiopian-born Binyam Mohamed says UK authorities knew he was tortured at the behest of US authorities during seven years of captivity.

David Miliband had said releasing the material would harm national security.

Judges ruled redacted paragraphs, which say his treatment was "cruel, inhuman and degrading", should be released.

The judgement was delivered by the three most senior Court of Appeal judges in England and Wales.

Commenting on the case, the prime minister's spokesman said the government stood firmly against torture and cruel and inhumane treatment. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8507852.stm

What grips my waste matter in all this is the utter cobblers by HMG over the 7 lines showing Mohammed was tourtured and their claim it will damage int' sharing with the US when a US court has already disclosed MORE then those 7 lines contain!

Total waste of public money and the courts time!
 
#2
The judgement in its entirety is here:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/65.html

It must make very uncomfortable reading for the Foreign Secretary and the intelligence agencies. But it really is difficult to see how the following could be held to damage the ability of the UK or US to produce intelligence, or that its revelation will cause any serious harm to intelligence exchanges between the two - it is, of course, very embarrassing for both governments, but that's not what the legal argument was about:

(iv) It was reported that a new series of interviews was conducted by the United States authorities prior to 17 May 2002 as part of a new strategy designed by an expert interviewer.

(v) It was reported that at some stage during that further interview process by the United States authorities, BM had been intentionally subjected to continuous sleep deprivation. The effects of the sleep deprivation were carefully observed.

(vi) It was reported that combined with the sleep deprivation, threats and inducements were made to him. His fears of being removed from United States custody and "disappearing" were played upon.

(vii) It was reported that the stress brought about by these deliberate tactics was increased by him being shackled during his interviews.

(viii) It was clear not only from the reports of the content of the interviews but also from the report that he was being kept under self-harm observation, that the interviews were having a marked effect upon him and causing him significant mental stress and suffering.

(ix) We regret to have to conclude that the reports provided to the SyS made clear to anyone reading them that BM was being subjected to the treatment that we have described and the effect upon him of that intentional treatment.

(x) The treatment reported, if had been administered on behalf of the United Kingdom, would clearly have been in breach of the undertakings given by the United Kingdom in 1972. Although it is not necessary for us to categorise the treatment reported, it could easily be contended to be at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of BM by the United States authorities.
C_C
 
#3
StickyToffeePudding said:
What grips my waste matter in all this is the utter cobblers by HMG over the 7 lines showing Mohammed was tourtured and their claim it will damage int' sharing with the US when a US court has already disclosed MORE then those 7 lines contain!

Total waste of public money and the courts time!

What grips my arse is why the fvck Labour were so anxious to bring Binyamin 'Honest, I was only on a sightseeing holiday in Afghanistan' Mohammed back here.
 
#4
Security risk my arse. Poltically embarassing yes. Embarassment is not a reason to cover up torture.

But, as a foreigner who abused the UK to go to Afghan for a bit of jihad-play, a shoeing is the least he should get.
 
#5
If the British Government believed he was so guilty that he deserved 18 months of torture, why the hell do they now allow him back in the UK? If after all that time he didn't confess to anything then questions need to be asked. By torturing him we probably made sure he could never be convicted even if he were guilty. What a tangled mess the government have created by trying to deceive the public.

That's the whole problem of allowing yourself to get dragged down into the murkey world of rendition, illegal detention and torture. You end up lying and tolerating actions that you should rightly condemn your enemies for. You end up tied in knots and unable to take any action.

Milliband and any of his predecessors who knew about this action should be held to account in International Courts.
 
#6
FFS he wasn't tortured, he had a few sleepless nights, and got shouted at a bit. A bit like Sandhurst or Brecon.

Bastard should be in jail.
 
#7
angular said:
FFS he wasn't tortured, he had a few sleepless nights, and got shouted at a bit. A bit like Sandhurst or Brecon.

Bastard should be in jail.
Somebody has to have a good long look at the torturers CV, he obviously wasn't as experienced or as qualified as he made out.

Any decent 'interviewer' would have had what he wanted to know in a matter of hours not 18 months.
 
#8
'FFS he wasn't tortured, he had a few sleepless nights, and got shouted at a bit. A bit like Sandhurst or Brecon.'

Not quite:

'By any measure, the treatment meted out to Binyam Mohamed was medieval in its barbarity.
Shackled in total blackness in the CIA's 'dark prison' in Kabul, he was forced to listen to ear-splitting music 24 hours a day for a month. In Morocco he was hung from walls and ceilings and repeatedly beaten, His penis and chest were sliced with a scalpel and hot, stinging liquid poured into the open wounds.'

I rather don't think that they allow that at Sandhurst or Brecon, if they are then things have changed since my day. Be very careful what you condone - I'm sure that those sort of comments were rife in Chile and Argentina when people started disappearing. When it's YOUR son or daughter lifted off the street it's a different matter - what will you say when they come for you?

We now have draconian 'anti-terror' laws which allow, for example, you to be detained for 28 days without charge then released, for your assets to be seized if you are suspected of terrorism, how long before someone is detained for merely saying something that embarasses the government? Be very careful what you wish for, you might just get it.
 
#9
mnairb said:
'FFS he wasn't tortured, he had a few sleepless nights, and got shouted at a bit. A bit like Sandhurst or Brecon.'

Not quite:

'By any measure, the treatment meted out to Binyam Mohamed was medieval in its barbarity.
Shackled in total blackness in the CIA's 'dark prison' in Kabul, he was forced to listen to ear-splitting music 24 hours a day for a month. In Morocco he was hung from walls and ceilings and repeatedly beaten, His penis and chest were sliced with a scalpel and hot, stinging liquid poured into the open wounds.'


I rather don't think that they allow that at Sandhurst or Brecon, if they are then things have changed since my day. Be very careful what you condone - I'm sure that those sort of comments were rife in Chile and Argentina when people started disappearing. When it's YOUR son or daughter lifted off the street it's a different matter - what will you say when they come for you?

We now have draconian 'anti-terror' laws which allow, for example, you to be detained for 28 days without charge then released, for your assets to be seized if you are suspected of terrorism, how long before someone is detained for merely saying something that embarasses the government? Be very careful what you wish for, you might just get it.
The bit I've bolded (emboldened?) wasn't in the actual court proceedings, or any of the seven paragraphs released by our courts. It was his original accusation. In other words, a made-up accusation to get headlines and sympathy. The sleep-deprivtion bit was the reality. Not pleasant, I grant you, but emphatically NOT torture.

Accusing us of torture is a standard Jihadi tactic. Where this does happen, it is wrong and counter-productive. Where our courts bend over backwards to protect our enemies, something needs to be done.

Oh, and I was wrong. He doesn't belong in jail. He belongs in Ethiopia.
 
#10
I somehow don't think the Met Police would be spending months investigating an MI5 agent for keeping someone awake for too long or subjecting a prisoner to bad and loud music.

David Davies is hardly a bleeding heart liberal but is fighting the case of some detainees. They have given evidence that they were subjected to:

Sleep deprivation (outlawed under various conventions incidentally)
Stress positions (I think we banned that 30 years ago)
Sensory deprivation
Water-boarding (not yet authorised as an RMAS training method)
Mock executions
Sustained beatings
Removal of finger nails.

As someone pointed out - hardly the actions of an intelligent or skilled interogator. They are acts of cruelty and barbarism over a sustained period. They achieved nothing and de-values those who did it and those they are supposed to serve.

If this sort of stuff were done to one of our soldiers we would be outraged and rightly so. I do not draw any sort of equivalence with terrorists, nor excuse their actions in any way but just make the point that we should not stoop to their disgusting levels.
 
#11
Herrumph said:
I somehow don't think the Met Police would be spending months investigating an MI5 agent for keeping someone awake for too long or subjecting a prisoner to bad and loud music.

David Davies is hardly a bleeding heart liberal but is fighting the case of some detainees. They have given evidence that they were subjected to:

Sleep deprivation (outlawed under various conventions incidentally)
Stress positions (I think we banned that 30 years ago)
Sensory deprivation
Water-boarding (not yet authorised as an RMAS training method)
Mock executions
Sustained beatings
Removal of finger nails.

As someone pointed out - hardly the actions of an intelligent or skilled interogator. They are acts of cruelty and barbarism over a sustained period. They achieved nothing and de-values those who did it and those they are supposed to serve.

If this sort of stuff were done to one of our soldiers we would be outraged and rightly so. I do not draw any sort of equivalence with terrorists, nor excuse their actions in any way but just make the point that we should not stoop to their disgusting levels.
You talk about large numbers of other detainees, and I take your point.

I was writing about our friend BM, who accused no-one of waterboarding, and whose other accusations were not substantiated in a British court.
 
#12
PoisonDwarf said:
Security risk my arse. Poltically embarassing yes. Embarassment is not a reason to cover up torture.

But, as a foreigner who abused the UK to go to Afghan for a bit of jihad-play, a shoeing is the least he should get.
Well said that man, give him back his orange track suit.
 
#14
blonde_guy said:
angular said:
He doesn't belong in jail. He belongs in Ethiopia.
The minute he was arrested for 'holidaying' in Afghanistan & Pakistan his British residency should have been revoked.
....and I have no problem with that. If he had been arrested and treated in accordance with accepted international law, that is exactly what we could have done with him. Now we will face years of court action whilst lawyers and judges decide to what extent his rights were abused and who is responsible. What a fecking mess and all because we weren't prepared to say to Dubya "what you are doing is wrong under international law and we cannot, even as your most loyal ally, support you".

The process of law is intended to protect both parties. If you ignore it, you inevitably build up greater problems.
 
#15
On another note, not totally unrelated, his immigration status was that he was given leave to remain whilst his case was resolved..... was his case ever resolved? And what is the legal status of people with leave to remain reference the British Government being duty bound to protect them etc. ?
 
#17
Binyam Mohamed is an Ethiopian, tortured by the Americans in Pakistan.
It has fook all to do with the UK, I really couldn't give a monkeys who did what to him.

However, if the Americans really believed in the "special relationship" they would have done the decent thing and topped the cnut.
Dropping his remains into the Carribean to feed the fishes would saved a lot of aggravation and expense to the UK.

Just another sponging leech who has no place in the UK, get rid. He simply isn't our problem. Deposit him at the Ethiopian Embassy and they can do what they like with him, just so long as they do it somewhere other than the UK.
 
#18
jagman said:
Binyam Mohamed is an Ethiopian, tortured by the Americans in Pakistan.
It has fook all to do with the UK, I really couldn't give a monkeys who did what to him.

However, if the Americans really believed in the "special relationship" they would have done the decent thing and topped the cnut.
Dropping his remains into the Carribean to feed the fishes would saved a lot of aggravation and expense to the UK.

Just another sponging leech who has no place in the UK, get rid. He simply isn't our problem. Deposit him at the Ethiopian Embassy and they can do what they like with him, just so long as they do it somewhere other than the UK.
Yep, we (UK & yanks), certainly seemed to have enlarged a molehill in certain respects
 
#19
Good, that smug intellectual, liberal, wet David Milliband must now come to terms with the fact he and his oppo Jack Sh1t are officially responsible for allowing and once they knew about it, failing to prevent, torture. I listened to him on PM last night as I drove home. He is possibly the most arrogant, ineffectual twunt in politics. Dave, top tip...saying "I have answered the question" when in fact you have not is neither big nor clever. For once Jim Naughtie's socialist principles came in handy as he held DM's feet to the coals...in amanner of speaking!

Frankly Neue Arbeit, if you are going to waffle on about human rights, issue limiting ROEs and give sanctuary to the people we are tryuing to fight somewhere else...this isn't a good news day for you. Everyone of you should shamefully take your Amnesty cards and hand them in at the desk. I hope thousands of the supporters of AI and NA will have a Damascene moment today. I doubt it.
 
#20
Here's my understanding:

When we invaded Afghanistan, the US were offering cash payments in return for 'Taliban' prisoners. As a result, many people - some of whom will have had legitimate reasons for being in Pakistan/Afghanistan (it isn't a crime for misguided Muslims to travel out to 'show solidarity', deliver aid or visit family) - were rounded up and 'sold'.

Obviously, the US lacked proof that these people had been involved with the Taliban, and as such locked them up at Guantanamo Bay. Not the right thing to do, but understandable as a short-term measure at the time. However, the fact that they were kept there for several years and tortured during that time is not only unprofessional and inhuman, but has given huge credibility and an extremely powerful recruitment tool to the extremists it was designed to stop.

If the British Government was complicit in what happened, as it seems may be the case, then those involved should resign immediately and personally face the (hopefully severe) legal concequences of what went on.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads