| The
Independent London August 12, 2004 Evidence
gained by torture allowed by British
judges From
Lord Justice Laws' judgement: 'I am quite unable
to see that any ... principle prohibits the
Secretary of State from relying ... on evidence
... which has or may have been obtained by
torture by agencies of other states over which
he has no powers of direction' By Robert Verkaik
Legal Affairs Correspondent THE use of torture to obtain
evidence against suspected terrorists was endorsed
yesterday by the [British] Court of Appeal
in a ruling that has brought Britain into conflict
with international human rights
campaigners. Two of the country's senior judges granted the
Home Secretary the right to hold terror suspects on
the basis of intelligence from tortured prisoners
at Guantanamo Bay and other US detention camps. Human rights groups and experts on international
law said Britain had, in effect, been given the
green light to trawl for evidence from torture
victims across the world. The controversial guidance emerged in the
court's decision to reject appeals from 10 foreign
nationals held for more than two years without
charge or trial in British prisons under emergency
terror laws introduced by David Blunkett
after the 11 September attacks. None of the men is accused of terrorist acts,
only that they belong to banned terrorist
organisations. Two of the 10 have voluntarily left
Britain and are bringing their appeals from abroad.
But Mr Blunkett, writing in today's
Independent, says yesterday's judgment on
the fate of the detainees is a clear vindication of
his policy on terrorism. "As Home Secretary. I must
balance legal theory with the practical job of
protecting people," he says. In yesterday's ruling, Lord Justice Laws
and Lord Justice Pill upheld the decision of
the special immigration appeals commission to
authorise the detention of the suspects, although
it was alleged the only evidence against them came
from men tortured by American security officers at
Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or Bagram air base in
Afghanistan. In a 190-page judgment, Lord Justice
Laws said he was "quite unable" to see why the Home
Secretary could not rely on evidence "coming into
his hands which has or may have been obtained
through torture by agencies of other States over
which he has no power of direction". The judge added: "If he has neither procured the
torture nor connived at it, he has not offended the
constitutional principle which I have sought to
outline." He said he could not believe "that the
law should sensibly impose on the Secretary of
State a duty of solemn inquiry as to the
interrogation methods used by agencies of other
sovereign states". But in the two-to-one
judgment, the dissenting judge, Lord Justice
Neuberger, warned that by "adopting the
fruits of torture" Britain would be weakening
its case against terrorists. All three judges said there was no evidence to
show that any intelligence had been gathered from
victims of torture, only that this had been alleged
by the men's lawyers. The men's solicitor, Gareth Peirce,
described as "terrifying" the suggestion in the
judgment that evidence obtained through torture
could be admissible. "It shows that we have
completely lost our way in this country legally and
morally," she said. "We have international treaty
obligations which prevent the use of evidence
obtained by torture in any proceedings." Shami Chakrabati, director of the human
rights group Liberty, said the effect of the
judgment would encourage the police and security
services to adopt a policy of "hear no evil, see no
evil". She said: "As long as the Home Secretary does
not inquire into how the information was obtained
he can use it in any way he wishes. This would
surely make Britain complicit in international acts
of torture." Kate Allen, director of Amnesty
International in the UK said she was appalled. "The
rule of law and human rights have become casualties
of the measures taken in the aftermath of 9/11.
This judgment is an aberration, morally and
legally." Peter Carter QC, chairman of the Bar's
human rights committee, said the ruling meant the
Government was being allowed to "connive in
torture". He added: "Under international law there
is an absolute prohibition on torture. This is not
just because it is an inhumane act but because of
the rationale that the fruits of torture are very
likely to be wholly unreliable and so it is
irrational to rely on information obtained by
torture." Lord Justice Neuberger said that "democratic
societies, faced with terrorist threats, should not
readily accept that the threat justifies the use of
torture, or that the end justifies the means. It
can be said that, by using torture, or even by
adopting the fruits of torture, a democratic state
is weakening its case against terrorists, by
adopting their methods, thereby losing the moral
high ground an open democratic society enjoys."
 
Lawyer
for one guard claims picture shows his client
taking orders from others - will generals take
the stand?-
Harvard
Law Professor Alan Dershowitz says U.S. Needs
Improved Torture Tactics
-
Okay for some
"Bundeswehrprofessor
[Michael Wolffsohn, jüdisch,
Israeli-Bürger] räsoniert
über Vorzüge der
Folter": German
professor Michael Wolffsohn calls for use of
torture | Summoned
before his minister
-
Expanding the Taguba
report: Israel's
role in training US army in torture
techniques
-
Danish government accuses
British troops Danish
medics witnessed Iraqi prisoner die after
interrogation
-
Reuters
agency released shocking details of US torture
of three of its journalists
 -
Israel's
involvement in Iraq: has torture experts at Abu
Ghraib Jail
-
Israeli
medical association: OK to break fingers of
Palestinian prisoners during
interrogation
- Amnesty International reports,
Israel Supreme Court to Rule on Torture and
Holding of Lebanese Hostages as Pawns
-
Human rights lawyers argue that Israel's
torture
of Palestinians is illegal (but sometimes
necessary)
-
Lipstadt's Witness Bernie Farber is Revealed
as Torture Apologist
-
 Israeli
torture of Palestinian prisoners seized in
the notorious Khiam prison in southern
Lebanon-
Sydney
Morning Herald reports: US creating torture
centers in non-US locations
"It allows us to get information from terrorists
in a way we can't do on US soil."
-
Robert Fisk reports: Inside
an Israeli torturers' den, manacles lie
abandoned
- Danish
opposition to the appointment of Israeli torture
chief, Ambassador Carmi Gillon (right)
-
Torture
of children by USA's closest allies
-
| ![[]](../../std/dings/list.gif){kind=small}
write to David
Irving