MI6 investigation makes case for full torture inquiry even stronger - Davey

“At the very least we need to know where and when this occurred, and what kind of incident is being investigated," said the Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary. Commenting on the revelation that the Metropolitan Police are to investigate allegations of MI6 complicity in torture, Edward Davey said:

“Given the gravity and number of allegations of UK complicity in torture, separate limited police investigations alone are inadequate.

“The case for a full judicial inquiry has become even stronger.

“The lack of information available on this case is unacceptable. There are surely many more details the Government could reveal which would not prejudice the case but are vital matters of public interest.

“At the very least we need to know where and when this occurred, and what kind of incident is being investigated. We also need to know what has suddenly prompted this apparent outbreak of conscience at MI6. Otherwise, the public may feel information is being kept secret to save political embarrassment.”

Hague demands Brown takes action over torture allegations

William Hague has written to the Prime Minister to ask what action he will take in response to the Joint Committee Report on allegations of British complicity in torture.

The Shadow Foreign Secretary stressed the Committee’s findings are “extremely serious”, and made clear, “We need to know whether the allegations of UK complicity contained in the report are being examined.”

He asked the Prime Minister whether he will refer any of the new allegations in the report to the Attorney General, who earlier this year launched a police investigation into allegations about the torture of Binyam Mohamed.

And he called on the Prime Minister to say whether the Attorney General is considering any additional cases of alleged UK complicity in torture.

Full text of letter from William Hague to Gordon Brown:

Dear Prime Minister,

I write to ask whether you plan to instruct the Attorney General to consider any of the allegations of UK complicity in torture which are contained in the report released today by the House of Lords and House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights. (HL Paper 152 HC 230 of 4^th August 2009).

In your written statement to the House of Commons of 18^th March on allegations of UK complicity in the torture of detainees overseas, you said that “if any cases of potential criminal wrongdoing come to light, the Government will refer them to the Attorney-General to consider whether there is a basis for inviting the police to conduct a criminal investigation.” (18 Mar 2009 : Column 55WS)

I understand that since March this year the Metropolitan police have been investigating the allegations about one such detainee, Mr Binyam Mohamed, at the behest of the Attorney General. (26 Mar 2009 : Column WS51).

I write to request that you clarify as a matter of urgency whether you intend to instruct the Attorney General to consider any additional allegations of UK complicity in the light of the Joint Committee report, which documents allegations of UK complicity in torture in respect of detainees held in Pakistan, Egypt, and Guantanamo Bay, and in the case of Uzbekistan, raises concerns about the receipt of information which may have been obtained through torture?

Can you confirm whether any of these allegations are already being examined by the Attorney General?

The Attorney General has declined in the past to clarify whether she is considering any additional cases, replying to my colleague Baroness Neville Jones that she “do[es] not propose to give a running commentary on consideration of the matter.” (7 May 2009 : Column WA139)

However does the public not have a right to know whether the Attorney General is considering any additional allegations? Is this clarity not important to reassure the public that these issues are being fully investigated in a wide-ranging fashion?

Therefore I hope that in response to this letter you will urgently clarify whether you intend to refer any of the allegations of complicity in torture contained in the Joint Committee report to the Attorney General, as well as how many such cases the Attorney General is currently considering.

Davey: Blair must come clean on torture or quit as MidEast envoy

Reacting to the allegations that Tony Blair knew about secret interrogation guidance for British intelligence officers who became aware of the torture of suspects, Edward Davey said; "Surely Tony Blair cannot hold the position of Middle East Envoy when he stands accused of breaking the UN Convention against torture".

Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary said; "He needs to either make clear what he knew about the torture policy or stand down as envoy. He cannot have it both ways."

"There are also serious questions to answer for both Jack Straw and David Blunkett. They had oversight of MI6 and MI5 at the time, and should have known about any guidance their agents had been given."

Edward Davey called for a debate over the guidance regarding the abuse of suspects under interrogation provided to the security services at Business Questions in Parliament today.

Ed concluded that "Parliament must be allowed a debate on the issue of oversight of guidance on interrogation and the current Justice Secretary, given his long-term involvement in this issue, should respond for the Government."

Control orders, torture techniques and the rise of the BNP - Does Britain still care about human rights?

Liberty poll shows authorities out of step with British public

(London – 15 June 2009) – In defiance of recent events, a poll released today by Liberty shows overwhelming support for human rights laws. Despite a week of the Government defending the unjust and unsafe control order system, the Metropolitan police accused of using "waterboarding" techniques with suspects and the BNP winning two European parliament seats, polling reveals that 97% think it is important that there is a law that protects rights and freedoms in the UK.

Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty, said;an rights in Britain. Despite headlines about "waterboarding" and punishment without trial, our common values still run extremely deep and the contents of the Human Rights Act are valued by the overwhelming majority of people."

The ComRes polling, commissioned by Liberty, sends a clear message to all political parties about the values the British public hold dear.

● 89% identified the right not to be tortured or degraded as either vital or important..

● 95% identified both the right to a fair trial and respect for privacy family life and the home as either vital or important.

● 76% believed that the right not to be detained without reason was either vital or important.

At last week's Liberty conference, recently retired senior Law Lord, Lord Bingham said of the

"This poll will be depressing reading for the cocky far right and others opposed to hum

Human Rights Act:

"Which of these rights, I ask, would we wish to discard? Are any of them trivial, superfluous, unnecessary? Are any of them un-British? There may be those who would like to live in a country where these rights are not protected, but I am not of their number."

Sabina Frediani, Campaigns Co-ordinator for Liberty, said;

"Britain hasn't just got talent; it's got an ocean of common sense and decency too. Public bodies have yet to step up and educate people about their rights protections but the public cherish them nonetheless. We need to be more suspicious of politicians who bash our human rights whilst demanding "due process" and "personal privacy" for themselves."

Liberty's poll coincides with the launch of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission's Human Rights Inquiry report. However, both the Commission and The Government have yet to educate the public about the Human Rights Act – the Liberty poll shows that only 10% remember seeing or receiving any information explaining the legislation.

Hague urges Miliband to bring the Binyam Mohamed case to an end

William Hague has called on David Miliband to "do the right thing" and ask the Obama Administration for the right to release information on Binyam Mohamed's treatment.

This follows a ruling from the High Court giving the Foreign Secretary one final opportunity to present evidence to the Court on Mr Mohamed's treatment. The Court will then reconsider whether it will publish those details.

William has said that David Miliband must "stop prevaricating and bring this saga to an end", adding:

"The Foreign Secretary's refusal to take this simple step is baffling and does nothing to dispel allegations of Britain's complicity in torture or the Government's attempt to cover it up."

And he stressed, "There is a need for clarity and a need to draw a line under this case."

Conservatives: We need a wider inquiry into torture allegations

Commenting on the news that the Attorney General has asked the Metropolitan Police to investigate allegations of torture in relation to Binyam Mohamed, David Cameron said:

"It is vital that we get to the bottom of whether Britain has been complicit in torture either advertently or inadvertently.

"I'm still not convinced that we will do that purely through an Attorney General or a Police investigation; I think we will need some form of wider inquiry to find out whether the right procedures and processes were in place to prevent Britain from being complicit in torture.

"We think you could get either a judge or a former permanent secretary to hold an inquiry; clearly these are sensitive issues that concern national security.

"You have to have arrangements to make sure that things that would be harmful for the national interest aren't published. But the key thing is getting to the bottom of what happened and making sure that if mistakes have been made in the past, ministers are open and clear about that and remove this potential stain from Britain's name."

Torture in London and a hell of a lot of angry questions

The Metropolitan Police has been ordered to pay £60,000 damages to a terror suspect after admitting in the High Court that arresting officers subjected him to violent assaults and religious abuse.

Their defence crumbled when lawyers for the Met conceded that Babar Ahmed from Tooting in London was the victim of gratuitous violence by territorial support group officers during the dawn arrest at his home in December 2003. One of the police officers involved could face criminal proceedings and Mr Ahmad was never charged with any offences arising out of his arrest.

In August 2004 he was detained at the request of the US government and has been held at Long Lartin prison since whilst he waits for a decision on whether his extradition to the US would contravene the European Convention on Human Rights. The officers who carried out the 2003 arrest had been briefed that Mr Ahmad was believed to be connected to al-Qaida and was the head of a south London terrorist group.

Call me crazy...but what on earth is going on in this country and with the human rights law that New Labour enacted when it came to power? When did it ever become acceptable either before or after the Human Rights Act 1998 to torture a suspect in custody? when did it become acceptable to hold someone in prison for five years without charge? When did it become acceptable to extradite someone to a country or regime that condones torture? How is it that we can't send people back to places like Jordan or Saudi without a stinking fuss but we are happy to send them to Guantanamo for the US to violate?

Just as importantly, why is our own police force of the opinion that it is acceptable for its officers, its protectors of society to torture suspects in its custody? How is it with the amount of surveillance technology available in interrogation rooms that officers managed to perform torture without immediate restraint or protest from fellow officers? Why is it that a police force that is habitually accused of and rife with institutional racism allowing this kind of behaviour against ethnic minorities from its officers? Why are we making the same mistakes with Islamic terrorists that we made in the 60s, 70s and 80s with the IRA? Why are we giving terrorists substance to their cause greater than they had to start with?

Why will the Metropolitan police not apologise for their appalling behaviour in this instance?

Answer the questions honestly and the only soul destroying conclusion that can be drawn is that when the dust settles, the actions of these representatives of our state renders us no better than those who seek to destroy us...and that makes me spit with anger and rage!!!

(Cab Office) Alleged complicity of the UK security and intelligence Agencies in torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has today written to the Prime Minister regarding the alleged complicity of the UK security and intelligence Agencies in torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Speaking on behalf of the Committee, the Chairman, Dr Kim Howells, MP said:

"In 2007 the Intelligence and Security Committee published a report on Rendition. This considered whether the UK security and intelligence Agencies had any knowledge of, and/or involvement in, rendition operations, and their overall policy for intelligence sharing with foreign liaison services in this context. The report detailed four cases of rendition dating back to 2002 which illustrated key developments in the awareness of the changing nature of the US rendition programme. One of these cases was that of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian national."

"Since our report was published there have been a number of new developments on which, as we already made clear in our 2007-2008 Annual Report, we have been conducting further investigations over the past year. One of these developments dates from mid- 2008, when we were informed by the Director General of the Security Service that new information had come to light about the Binyam Mohamed case which had been overlooked during the Committee's original rendition inquiry."

"The Intelligence and Security Committee does not investigate individual cases - any allegations of misconduct by, or on behalf of, the UK intelligence and security Agencies are a matter for the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), which is the appropriate statutory body to undertake a full independent investigation of such allegations. This Committee's role is to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the security and intelligence Agencies. However, in this instance we considered that this new evidence had a far wider significance that went beyond an individual case, and that it raised questions about the policy and procedures that our security and intelligence Agencies follow. As such it was clearly a matter for the Intelligence and Security Committee and we therefore considered that a further detailed investigation was essential."

"As a result we have taken further, in depth, evidence from the intelligence and security Agencies, and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. We have today reported our findings on a number of aspects - including the issues raised about the policies that the UK security and intelligence Agencies have followed and should follow - and made recommendations to the Prime Minister."

"The issue of whether an officer from the Security Service committed a criminal offence in relation to the case of Binyam Mohamed is currently under investigation by the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions. The Committee will therefore not be making any further public comment at this time."

DARFURI SURVIVORS TO RALLY IN LONDON AS ICC DECIDES ON BASHIR ARREST WARRANT

Today the judges at the ICC will announce whether or not they are going to issue an arrest warrant for Omar Bashir, the President of Sudan, on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide in Darfur.

If a warrant is issued, it will be the first time that such a step has been taken against a sitting head of state. As the ICC judges announce their decision in the Hague, Darfuri survivors will be gathered in capital cities across Europe to remember their murdered loved ones and destroyed communities – the victims of this crisis, whose slaughter demands justice.

London rally. In London, they will congregate for a commemoration outside the Sudanese Embassy from midday to 2.00pm, reading out the names of over a thousand victims and holding a minute’s silence at 1.00pm, the moment the ICC’s decision is announced.

“Khartoum will make a lot of noise that this is a politically motivated assault on the President, and through him, the Sudanese state and Sudanese people,” says Ishag Mekki, Humanitarian Officer for the Darfur Union – the umbrella group for Darfuri exiles living in the UK. “Amid that noise, just remember that on Bashir’s watch, millions of Sudanese men, women and children have been driven from their homes, killed or raped in Darfur. Not because they carry guns, but because of who they are. This is a matter of justice, not politics. And we, the survivors, know how desperately justice is needed.”

Darfur perpetrators implicate Bashir

Ahead of the ICC’s announcement, in a film released by the Aegis Trust (see earlier article) even the perpetrators themselves have begun to speak out against their masters in Khartoum; Janjaweed fighters describing how they call in Government airstrikes before attacking, and soldiers explaining how they were ordered by senior officers to rape girls as young as eleven or twelve.

“The rape and murder of the innocent is completely contrary to the tenets of Islam. It is contrary to basic principles of humanity. And it is a crime in International law. Would you accept it if your loved ones were the victims?”, asks Nejwa Gabir Ahmed, a survivor from Darfur living in the UK. She adds: “Unless the perpetrators are brought to justice, and unless justice is seen to be done, there will never be peace and reconciliation in Darfur. And we, the exiled, will never be able to return to our homeland with peace in our hearts.”

Call to UN Security Council: resist pressure from Khartoum over Article 16

It is widely expected that if the ICC issues an arrest warrant for Omar Bashir, politicians and diplomats in many quarters will increase the pressure for the UN Security Council to invoke Article 16 and suspend the process of international justice for Darfur.

“I ask the decision-makers at the UN Security Council; do not lightly trade away justice for the victims, or give it up in the face of blackmail from Khartoum,” says Darfuri survivor Khatir Mohammed, General Secretary of the Darfur Union. “A murder suspect is not let off the charges if he threatens to go out and kill more people. Nor should Omar Bashir, or any of those suspected of crimes against humanity in Darfur, be allowed to get off the hook by threatening peacekeepers, aid workers or our people in Sudan.”

A new report just released by Aegis, ‘The Enforcement of International Criminal Law’, addresses ways in which the international community could strengthen prospects for enforcement of any arrest warrant against Bashir.

Darfur Destroyed: Sudan's Perpetrators Break Silence

Darfur Destroyed: Sudan's perpetrators break silence from Aegis Trust on Vimeo.

Binyam Mohamed Vs Milliband & The Government

Well there doesn't seem to be a great choice of things to get upset about today except for one. So far the news on TV is dominated by the Oscars and of course the arrival or rather the return of Binyam Mohamed after 4 years in prison without charge or trial at Guantanamo Bay with a further 3 years incarcerated at the hands of the US.

In case there is any confusion about who this chap is, this is the chap who David Milliband tried to cover up and silence. This is the man who was tortured whilst in captivity with the full knowledge, cooperation of and exploitation by the British government. Mohamed said of his ordeal:

"For myself, the very worst moment came when I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence."

He added: "I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.

"I am not asking for vengeance; only that the truth should be made known, so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured."

I hope that his legal team and both Amnesty International and Reprieve who are involved in this issue advise him strongly to reconsider his position and go absolutely for out and out vengeance. The only way to get any kind satisfactory outcome from this situation is to make it as personal as his abusers made it with him. I'm not suggesting of course that he exacts like for like revenge and not for obvious practical reasons, but because it's important to take the moral high ground and that shouldn't be too difficult anyway against the UK government. It is vital that everyone knows the detail of his ordeal, what happened to him, who was responsible for his treatment and who sanctioned it. I'm not just talking about the people on the ground, but the politicians, the decision makers who were ultimately responsible for this appalling breach of human rights.

Torture is and should always be morally unacceptable and its prohibition is in fact an absolute legal right under the government's own Human Rights Act 1998. This means that any British officials or government departments that are responsible for or have a hand in the prolonged imprisonment and torture of this unfortunate individual are on the wrong side of the law. This presents an interesting choice. Either those acting unlawfully need to be sacked and made accountable in court for their actions or the government will accept that their own legislation is not worth the paper it is written on.

In reality, what will happen is the government will order an enquiry and will be long gone by the time it reports. Those responsible will be off working in Europe or in the Lords by that time and will never be made to scoop their political poop on this issue, which as an issue will probably ultimately achieve nothing...and that drives me to lunacy.

Silence Over Poor Jade Goody Broken

Well...I can't keep quiet any longer on the issue of Jade Goody. It's no secret that I've never been a fan of hers or the whole genre of entertainment that spewed her forth from merciful obscurity. I have decided in probably the worst taste that I am going to ask the courts for clarification over the issue of whether I or anyone else can can go with me to Switzerland on a suicide holiday to escape her painful and humiliating demise.

Yes, she's going to make a lot of money for her family. Lets face it her ruthless exploitation by the media and other celebs trying to jump on the band wagon and show their "support" is the only way her poor family are likely to make the kind of money on offer. I think that those who are pulling her strings are being allowed to manipulate the situation and in fact although everything is being done in the name of her family, very little, in fact no regard it seems is being allowed for the dignity and privacy of this family during what must be an awful time for them. It seems a real shame that the last memories her children will have of her will be of a mother surrounded and exploited by vultures who they will never see in person again as long as they live. They should be left alone to enjoy the last moments with their mother as a family in peace and to build some good memories.

I think the situation is sick and I don't want to watch it. I don't think anyone with any real sense of moral integrity would want to watch it either because its only a step away from watching public executions. Who knows, we seem to be happy enough as a nation to accept that the British government is involved in torture so maybe its just the next logical step anyway.

Milliband Cements Place in Rogues Gallery

Over my 35 years there are probably only a handful of people who I have taken an instant dislike to. I don't just mean a bad feeling or a suspicion that something might not be quite right, but I mean an absolute loathing from day one to the point of utter revulsion. I have never had these feelings about people I have met personally (although there were a few that came close). Rather, they have always been reserved it seems for people on the tele or in the news. Amongst them are the following; Davina (go to the bloody toilet if you need to woman and speak in sentences not just bloody words) McCall, Tony (& Cherie)(where are the celebrities? where are the cameras? where's my mirror & where's my cash) Blair, Gwenith (please don't get me started on her) Paltrow, Opera Winfrey, Delia Smith, Mr & Mrs Beckham, Shane Warne, Roman Abramovich, Kate Moss, Liam and Noel, Lilly Allen and lastly but by no means leastly Jonathan Ross.

A very worthy and recent addition to my rogues gallery is of course David Milliband. I haven't been able to give any rational reasons for my burning hatred of this politician until now. Ask me and I can justify the reasons in detail why I believe that all of the others with the possible exception of Warne have contributed negatively on society, but until recently, I have only been able to say that my dislike for Milliband is based on instinct. However I feel that my instincts have been confirmed via the recent attempt by Milliband's office to cover up the British government's involvement in the torture of a terrorist suspect held at Guantanamo Bay. The reports in the papers seem to suggest that the man is not only deceitful and a bully but also professionally incompetent.

So...I think my instincts have been fairly accurate on this one all along although if I'm not mistaken, these seem to be the very qualities that New Labour was built and run on by its original architects. This means that Milliband is just a product of his environment. Does it mean I dislike him any less...not really!