The aftermath of the Iraq War - the story continues ....

On 23rd November 2011 the Law and Lawyers blog looked at The unfolding aftermath of the Iraq War and considered the decision of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in R (Ali Zaki Mousa) v Secretary of State for Defence [2011] EWCA Civ 1334 where the court (Maurice Kay, Sullivan and Pitchford LJJ) held that an investigatory process into allegations of ill-treatment committed by British armed forces personnel did not meet the requirements of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights as interpreted and applied by the European Court of Human Rights.  The investigatory process had been set up by the Secretary of State for Defence and involved an Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) reporting to the Iraq Historic Allegations Panel (IHAP).

The Administrative Court has now handed down judgment in R (Ali Zaka Mousa) v Secretary of State for Defence [2013] EWHC 1412 (Admin) - Sir John Thomas President of the Queen's Bench Division and Silber J.  It is a

Extraordinary Rendition - new material

Strasbourg, 07.06.2006 – Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly rapporteur Dick Marty today revealed what he called a global “spider’s web” of CIA detentions and transfers and listed seven Council of Europe member states who could be held responsible, in varying degrees, for violations of the rights of named individuals by colluding in these operations.

----

Writing in The Guardian 22nd May 2013, Ian Cobain and James Ball draw attention to new research showing that UK support for the CIA's global rendition programme after the September 11 terrorist attacks on the US was far more substantial than has previously been recognised - see UK provided more support for CIA rendition than thought - study.

Evidence gathered by The Rendition Project – an interactive website that maps thousands of rendition flights – highlights 1,622 flights in and out of the UK by aircraft now known to have been involved in the agency's secret kidnap and detention programme.

The CIA's use of UK airports was first reported by the Guardian in September 2005.   Jack Straw,  then foreign secretary,

Constitution Project Task Force Report on Detainee Treatment

The Washington based Constitution Project has published its Task Force Report on Detainee Treatment.  It is a lengthy pdf document (600 pages) but a 'quick read' is possible by looking at pages 1 (Statement) and 9 (Findings and Recommendations).

The following is by Jesselyn Radack - National Security & Human Rights Director for the Government Accountability Project, the USA's  leading whistleblower protection and advocacy organization.  It is reproduced from Government Accountability Blog 

The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment is an independent, non-partisan group that produced a report comprehensively documenting the United States' descent into torture. The Task Force released a 600-page report today.

Among the Report's many conclusions:

U.S. forces, in many instances, used interrogation techniques on detainees that constitute torture. American personnel conducted an even larger number of interrogations that involved “cruel, inhuman, or degrading” treatment. Both categories of actions violate U.S. laws and international treaties. Such conduct was directly counter to values of the Constitution and our nation.

and

Human rights reports ~ Alleged UK complicity in torture ~ Guantanamo Bay Hunger Strikes

Council of Europe Report:

The 6th Annual Report of the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers has been published.  It deals with Supervision of the execution of judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. 


Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report:

The FCO has published the 2012 Human Rights and Democracy report.   Foreign Secretary William Hague commented:

'The promotion and protection of human rights is at the heart of the UK’s foreign policy objectives.  I, along with my ministerial team, consistently raise human rights violations wherever and whenever they occur.  And with this in mind, I am delighted to introduce the FCO’s 2012 Annual Human Rights and Democracy Report, which details our efforts to promote human rights during 2012.' 

Confessions of a Judicial Activist: Albie Sachs

The School of Law at Queen Mary, University of London and the British Institute of Human Rights hosted the launch of the Human Rights Collegium (HRC), a collaborative initiative focused on providing scholarly expertise, research and teaching on human rights. The inaugural HRC lecture was given by Justice Albie Sachs, author, activist and retired judge on the Constitutional Court of South Africa. The event was chaired by Geraldine Van Bueren, Professor of International Human Rights Law, Queen Mary, University of London and Co-Director of the HRC.

Academy of Achievement - Albie Sachs

The Queen Mary University, School of Law, London 5th March 2013 ~ Confessions of a Judicial Activist: Albie Sachs 

 Listen to a podcast of 'Confessions of a Judicial Activist' (mp3 approx 60 minutes). Choose 'playback' to play video, slides and audio.

Mariam Rajavi ~ exclusion from the UK

The Home Secretary (Theresa May) decided that prominent Iranian Mrs Maryam Rajavi may not enter the United Kingdom on the basis that her entry into the United Kingdom would not be conducive to the public good. The reasons are based principally on foreign policy and security grounds, not on fears about Mrs Rajavi's conduct here. 

A judicial review of Mrs May's decision failed when heard in the High Court and that decision has been upheld in the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) - R (Lord Carlile of Berriew and others) v Secretary of State for Home Affairs [2013] EWCA Civ 199 (Arden, Patten and McCombe LJJ).  Mrs Rajavi is the leader of two groups in Iran opposed to the government there. She is the de facto leader of the People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran ("PMOI") and the "President-elect" of the National Council for the Resistance of Iran (NCRI) since 1993.

Interestingly,

Iraq ~ The Al-Sweady Inquiry

The process of trying to establish the truth about events during the Iraq War and its aftermath continues.

On 4th March 2013, the Al-Sweady Inquiry commenced.  A preliminary hearing was held 3 years ago on 9th March 2010 and four "Directions" hearings took place in the period up to 18th December 2012.  All this appears to be a particularly slow, cumbersome and already costly process with costs (at February 2013) of almost £16m.

The Inquiry is chaired by retired High Court Judge Sir Thayne Forbes and is being held under the Inquiries Act 2005.  It was set up by Labour Minister Bob Ainsworth and given the following terms of reference:

The Iran Tribunal ~ Judgment

The Iran Tribunal has given its judgment relating to events in Iran in the 1980s under the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini.   See the Tribunal's Press Release of 7th February (PDF).  The full Judgment may be downloaded here  (Word Document).

Media Comment - The Independent 7th February 2013 - Iran's Srebrenica: How Ayatollah Khomeini sanctioned the deaths of 20000 enemies of the State. 

The Tribunal sought to investigate the crimes committed by the Islamic Republic of Iran against the country’s political prisoners during the 1980s, when between 15,000 and 20,000 citizens were tortured and executed under the power of the Khomeini’s Fatwa (Telegraph 4th February 2001) for holding beliefs that conflicted with the regime.  The Tribunal heard firsthand accounts of the appalling atrocities committed against Iranian citizens.  The Islamic Republic of Iran was invited to participate in the trial but refused to engage with the Tribunal process.

The Tribunal comprised 6 respected jurists under the chairmanship of Judge Johann Kriegler (Judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa 1994-2002) and was assisted by

Rendition and Torture ~ Report implicates the UK

Rendition by the United States of America's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the subject of a report by the Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI).  The publication of the report was covered by The Guardian (5th February 2013) CIA rendition: More than a quarter of countries offered covert support

The report - "Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition" - (PDF 216 pages) - states that some 54 countries (including the United Kingdom) offered some level of support for rendition.  The United Kingdom is discussed in Section V at para 51.

According to the report, the United Kingdom:

• Assisted in the extraordinary rendition of individuals, gave the CIA intelligence that led to the extraordinary rendition of individuals, interrogated individuals who were later secretly detained and extraordinarily rendered, submitted questions for interrogation of individuals who were secretly detained and extraordinarily rendered, and permitted use of its airspace and airports for flights associated with extraordinary rendition operations.

Drones ~ Judgment of the High Court

The High Court handed down judgment in R (Khan) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2012] EWHC 3728 Admin - Moses LJ and Simon J - 21st December 2012.

The background to the case was that people attending an outdoor meeting (Jurga) in Waziristan on 17th March 2011 were killed by what the claimant (Mr Khan) asserted to be a missile fired from an American drone.  One of those killed was Mr Khan's father.   The allegation that the drone strikes are linked to agents of the US government and to UK employees of GCHQ was based on various reports which were summarised in a 'respectable but unconfirmed' report in the Sunday times 25th July 2010.  The British government neither confirmed nor denied the allegations though the government has consistently said that its operations are in accordance with the law.  This assertion was not seen by the court as breaching the 'no comment' policy.

Mr Khan wished to challenge, by judicial review, what he described as a 'decision' by the Secretary of State relating to employees of GCHQ passing information to the USA.  He sought a declaration that where a person passes such information and does so with foresight that there is a serious risk that the information would be used to target or kill an individual then the person passing the information would not be entitled to a defence of combatant immunity and may be liable under English criminal law (e.g. for encouraging murder - Serious Crime Act 2007 Part 2  - etc).  Accordingly, the Secretary of State had no power to direct or authorise the passing of such information.