Britain's MI5 & MI6 accused of colluding in torture of terrorist suspects

[Al-khiyal]

Grande Bretagne :
Enquête policière sur des accusations de torture contre le MI6

Dimanche 13 Septembre 2009 -- Scotland Yard a annoncé vendredi avoir ouvert une enquête concernant des accusations de torture contre le MI6, les services de renseignements extérieurs britanniques. L'affaire concerne un Britannique qui n'a pas été identifié et n'est pas liée aux tortures que l'ex-détenu de Guantanamo Binyam Mohamed dit avoir subies, a indiqué un porte-parole de la police britannique, précisant que l'enquête avait été ouverte à la demande du MI6. "Nous pouvons confirmer que l'Attorney general (la baronne Patricia Scotland, principal conseiller juridique du gouvernement, ndlr) a demandé à la police métropolitaine d'enquêter sur un dossier qui a été signalé par les services de renseignements" MI6, a indiqué Scotland Yard. Cette enquête "n'est pas liée à Binyam Mohamed mais examine les conditions dans lesquelles un citoyen non britannique a été détenu et l'éventuelle implication de personnel britannique", a ajouté vendredi la police sans plus de précisions. Binyam Mohamed a été détenu à Guantanamo pendant plus de quatre ans avant d'être transféré début février en Grande-Bretagne, pays où il avait résidé à partir de 1994. L'Ethiopien, 30 ans, a affirmé qu'un membre du MI5, les services de renseignements intérieurs britanniques, avait fourni les questions lors des interrogatoires assortis de tortures qu'il a subis dans un site secret au Maroc, après son arrestation au Pakistan en 2002. La police a lancé fin mars une enquête sur le rôle du MI5 dans les tortures présumées infligées à Binyam Mohamed. Evoquant la nouvelle enquête, qui concerne elle le MI6, le ministre des affaires étrangères David Miliband a confirmé son ouverture dans une lettre à William Hague, porte-parole pour les Affaires étrangères pour le parti conservateur (opposition). "Comme vous le savez, la police enquête déjà sur des accusations liées à Binyam Mohamed. Un cas supplémentaire a par la suite été signalé par l'Attorney general à la police", a écrit le ministre. Selon lui, le MI6 avait agi "de sa propre initiative, sans que cela soit suscité par une quelconque accusation contre le service de renseignements ou la personne concernée". Le chef du MI6 John Scarlett a affirmé début août que ses agents n'avaient pas recours à la torture: "Nos officiers attachent autant d'importance que n'importe qui d'autre aux valeurs des droits de l'homme". "Ils ont également la responsabilité de protéger le pays contre le terrorisme et ces problèmes doivent être débattus et compris dans ce contexte", a-t-il ajouté, soulignant qu'il n'y avait eu "ni torture ni complicité de torture". L'organisation de défense des droits de l'homme Amnesty International a appelé "à une enquête complète, impartiale et indépendante" sur toutes les allégations contre des Britanniques de complicité de torture.

[Al-khiyal]

MI5 chief defends links with foreign agencies accused of torture

October 16, 2009 -- The head of MI5 has issued a vigorous defence of the organisation's co-operation with intelligence agencies known to use torture, saying that it thwarted many terrorist attacks after 9/11 and saved British lives. Speaking publicly for the first time about the mounting concern over British involvement in the torture of terrorism suspects overseas, Jonathan Evans, the director-general of the security service, said the country had quickly needed help to understand the nature of the threat from al-Qaida at a time when another attack could have been imminent. "In my view we would have been derelict in our duty if we had not worked, circumspectly, with overseas liaisons who were in a position to provide intelligence that could safeguard this country from attack," he said.

Speaking at his old university, Bristol, last night, Evans said he did not defend "the abuses that have recently come to light within the U.S. system since 9/11". He said working with the intelligence agencies of other countries that he did not identify had posed "a real dilemma" for MI5 officers working in difficult and at times dangerous circumstances. "Given the pressing need to understand and uncover al-Qaida's plans, were we to deal, however circumspectly, with those security services who had experience of working against al-Qaida on their own territory? Or were we to refuse to deal with them, accepting that in so doing we would be cutting off a potentially vital source of information that would prevent attacks in the west?"

Evans defended the current system of oversight of MI5 and the other main intelligence agencies, MI6 and GCHQ, by ministers, retired judges and a committee of MPs and peers, the intelligence and security committee (ISC). This year, parliament's joint committee on human rights (JCHR) condemned the current arrangements, saying MI5 was "woefully" unaccountable and there needed to be an independent inquiry into allegations of complicity in torture. Evans insisted: "It would be self-defeating to have such onerous and detailed scrutiny that the operational effectiveness and responsiveness of the service was seriously impaired. Equally, accountability must be sufficiently robust to ensure that any inappropriate action on the part of the service comes to light." He pledged that MI5 would not conceal any relevant information from the courts that are due to consider claims being brought against the security service and the Home Office by a number of victims of alleged torture. His speech did not address charges that once a policy had been devised that allowed MI5 and MI6 officers to interrogate detainees whom they knew were being tortured by others, that same policy was used to facilitate torture.

In January 2002, according to a report by the ISC, MI5 and MI6 officers interrogating detainees in Afghanistan were told they did not need to intervene to prevent those prisoners from being abused by the U.S. military. "Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this," the officers were told. A number of international law experts have since questioned the legality of this advice. This policy was then employed in other countries. In May 2002 in Pakistan, for example, an MI5 officer interrogated Binyam Mohamed, a British resident, despite knowing he was being tortured. That matter is now the subject of a Scotland Yard investigation. According to the authorised history of MI5 published earlier this month, "this appears to be the first time in the history of the Security Service that its actions have been the subject of a criminal investigation". The actions of an MI6 officer are also being investigated by police.

By 2004, MI5 was asking a notorious Pakistani intelligence agency to detain British terrorism suspects, and then providing lists of questions – a practice that the JCHR and a United Nations special rapporteur on human rights have since denounced as amounting to complicity in torture. Two years later, police in Manchester decided against arresting Rangzieb Ahmed, a terrorist who was about to leave the country for Pakistan, despite having gathered evidence against him that was later used in court. Instead, they tipped off the Pakistani authorities that Ahmed was on his way. MI6 then suggested that Pakistani intelligence officers detain him, and MI5 and Greater Manchester police drew up a list of questions they wanted him to be asked. By the time Ahmed was deported to the UK 13 months later, three of his fingernails were missing. When Ahmed appeared in court, attempts were made to conceal what had happened through the use of in-camera evidence, and a Guardian reporter covering the hearing was threatened with arrest for contempt of court. Details were eventually made public by David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, under the protection of parliamentary privilege. Davis told the Commons: "I cannot imagine a more obvious case of the outsourcing of torture."

The Guardian has established that Tony Blair, when prime minister in 2004, was aware of the existence of the guidance given to intelligence officers two years earlier. What he knew of its consequences is less clear. The Guardian has repeatedly asked him about any role he played in approving the policy, whether he knew that it led to people being tortured, whether he personally authorised interrogations that took place in Guantánamo Bay and Afghanistan as well as Pakistan, and whether he made any effort to change the policy. Blair's spokesman responded by saying: "It is completely untrue that Mr Blair has ever authorised the use of torture. He is opposed to it in all circumstances. Neither has he ever been complicit in the use of torture."

When the Guardian pointed out to Blair that it had not suggested that he had authorised the use of torture – as opposed to asking him whether he had authorised a policy that led to people being tortured – and that his spokesman had not answered the questions that were asked, his spokesman replied: "Tony Blair does not condone torture, has never authorised it nor colluded in it. He continues to think our security services have done and continue to do a crucial and very good job." In March, Gordon Brown announced that the policy was to be rewritten and then made public. It remains unclear when this might happen.

[Al-khiyal]

Britain 'complicit in mistreatment and possible torture' says UN

January 27, 2010 -- United Nations human rights investigators have concluded that the British government has been complicit in the mistreatment and possible torture of several of its own citizens during the "war on terror". In a report published today that will make difficult reading for ministers who repeatedly denied the UK's involvement in torture, UN officials have indicated that there is clear evidence of the UK's role in the secret detention overseas of several British Muslims. The officials say that such secret imprisonment – or "proxy detentions" – not only facilitates torture, but may amount to torture in its own right. In one starkly worded passage, they warn that if a state's use of proxy detention had been systematic or widespread it would amount to a "crime against humanity".

The 226-page UN report follows the publication two months ago of a dossier entitled Cruel Britannia, from the New York-based NGO Human Rights Watch, whose researchers interviewed several Pakistani intelligence agents who alleged that they had tortured British terrorism suspects on behalf of their UK counterparts. It also follows a series of disclosures in the Guardian about the role played by officers of MI5, MI6 and Greater Manchester police in the detention and questioning under torture of terrorism suspects held in Pakistan and elsewhere.

The UN investigation into torture and rendition across the globe since 9/11 lasted several years and was led by Martin Scheinin, UN special rapporteur on terrorism and human rights, and Manfred Nowak, special rapporteur on torture. In a move that will do little to ease the discomfort of western governments that were the focus of the investigation, the two men and their aides were assisted by members of a UN working party on secret detentions that was first set up in 1979 to investigate the fate of people who were "disappeared" by the Pinochet regime in Chile. Their report concludes that secret detention "amounts to a case of enforced disappearance" and that it is "a manifold human rights violation that cannot be justified under any circumstances, including during states of emergency".

Listing those cases in which they conclude that a state has been complicit in a secret detention, the authors highlight "the United Kingdom in the cases of several individuals, including Binyam Mohamed, Salahuddin Amin, Zeeshan Siddiqui, Rangzieb Ahmed and Rashid Rauf". Ahmed, 34, from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, was detained in Pakistan in 2006. MPs have heard that after evidence of his terrorist offences had been gathered he was allowed to fly from Manchester to Islamabad, and that MI6 then suggested to a notorious Pakistani intelligence agency that its officers should detain him as he was a dangerous terrorist. After MI5 and Greater Manchester police drew up a list of questions to be put to Ahmed, the Pakistani agents who were questioning him ripped out a number of his fingernails. Ahmed alleges he was also beaten, whipped and deprived of sleep. He was later deported to the UK, tried and convicted of terrorism offences and is now serving a life sentence at Full Sutton prison near York.

Salahuddin Amin, 35, from Luton, Bedfordshire, was deported to the UK in February 2005 after spending 10 months in the custody of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI). The UK courts have heard that he was questioned 11 times by MI5 officers, and Amin says he was tortured before each session. Human Rights Watch says it has spoken to Pakistani intelligence officers who broadly corroborate his account. Amin was also tried and convicted and is serving a life sentence at Whitemoor prison in Cambridgeshire.

The British government is attempting to block the disclosure of classified U.S. documents about Binyam Mohamed, leading to speculation that they contain evidence that senior figures in Tony Blair's administration had some knowledge of Mohamed's torture in Pakistan in 2002. The whereabouts of Rauf and Siddiqui are unknown. Scotland Yard detectives are investigating MI5's role in the mistreatment of Mohamed and one other unnamed individual.

The UN report contains warnings that inquiries into these two cases may not be sufficient to meet the UK's obligations under international law, however, saying that the British government and other states would face claims of responsibility "when the state received claims that someone had been subjected to torture or other ill-treatment, or an enforced disappearance, or otherwise received information suggesting that such acts may have taken place but failed to have the claims impartially investigated". The UN report adds: "According to the European court, authorities must always make a serious attempt to find out what happened and should not rely on hasty or ill-founded conclusions to close their investigation or as the basis of their decisions." The report details the role of many other governments in the kidnapping and secret detention of terrorism suspects. Among those highlighted alongside the UK are the US, Algeria, China, Iran, Sudan and Zimbabwe.

The Foreign Office described the report as "unsubstantiated and irresponsible" and maintained that the authors had not substantiated their claims during meetings with FO officials. "As far as allegations against the UK are concerned, the report contains no new information and repeats unproven allegations as if they were fact. The UK's position on secret detention is clear: we oppose any deprivation of liberty that amounts to placing individuals beyond the protection of the law." Despite the FO's assertion that there is no evidence to support the UN's allegations, the attorney general has asked Scotland Yard detectives to investigate a number of cases.

A spokeswoman for Reprieve, the legal charity that represents Binyam Mohamed, said: "The findings make uncomfortable reading for states like the UK who – despite their public condemnation of such practices – are revealed as complicit in war crimes like kidnap, secret detention, and torture. Worryingly, the report indicates that the UK intelligence services lack the oversight that would prevent crimes like complicity in torture from recurring in the future."

[Al-khiyal]

[Al-khiyal]