Daily Archives: July 10, 2005


UK Foreign Affairs Committee: “We find it surprising and unsettling that the Government has twice failed to answer our specific question on whether or not the United Kingdom receives or acts upon information extracted under torture…”

The United Kingdom Parliament: Sixth report of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs – March 22nd 2005

61. We conclude that, now that the British nationals have been released from detention at Guant’namo Bay, the Government need no longer keep its diplomacy quiet in the interests of increasing leverage over individual cases. We recommend that the Government make strong public representations to the US administration about the lack of due process and oppressive conditions in Guant’namo Bay and other detention facilities controlled by the US in foreign countries, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. We further recommend that, during the United Kingdom Presidency of the EU, the Government raise the situation at these facilities in the UN Commission for Human Rights…

69. We conclude that US personnel appear to have committed grave violations of human rights of persons held in detention in various facilities in Iraq, Guant’namo Bay and Afghanistan. We recommend that the Government make it clear to the US administration, both in public and in private, that such treatment of detainees is unacceptable…

72. We agree with the recommendation of the Intelligence and Security Committee that the British authorities should seek agreement with allies on the methods and standards for the detention, interviewing or interrogation of people detained in future operations…

76. We conclude that some British personnel have committed grave violations of human rights of persons held in detention facilities in Iraq, which are unacceptable. We recommend that all further allegations of mistreatment of detainees by British troops in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere be investigated thoroughly and transparently. We conclude that it is essential that wherever there are overseas detention facilities, those responsible for detainees must have adequate training. We recommend that the Government review its training of and guidance to agency personnel, officers, NCOs and other ranks on the treatment of detainees to ensure that there is no ambiguity on what is permissible…

85. We conclude that the arguments for evaluating information which purports to give details of, for example, an impending terrorist attack, whatever its provenance, are compelling. We further conclude, however, that to operate a general policy of use of information extracted under torture would be to condone and even to encourage torture by repressive states.

86. We find it surprising and unsettling that the Government has twice failed to answer our specific question on whether or not the United Kingdom receives or acts upon information extracted under torture by a third country. We recommend that the Government, in its response to this Report, give a clear answer to the question, without repeating information already received twice by this Committee.

87. We recommend that the Government set out, in its response to this Report, a full and clear explanation of how its policy on the use of evidence gained under torture is consistent with the United Kingdom’s international commitments as set out in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which states, at Article 15, that “Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made”…

98. We conclude that the Government has failed to deal with questions about extraordinary rendition with the transparency and accountability required on so serious an issue. If the Government believes that extraordinary rendition is a valid tool in the war against terrorism, it should say so openly and transparently, so that it may be held accountable. We recommend that the Government end its policy of obfuscation and that it give straight answers to the Committee’s questions of 25 February.

View with comments

Update on retrospective postings

As our regular visitors will know, one of the functions of this site is to act as a reference source or database of articles, speeches and interviews relating to the work of Craig Murray, Uzbekistan, Jack Straw, and the UK and US Governments involvement in extraordinary rendition and torture.

To try and ensure the site is as complete as possible, five items have been retrospectively added today in various sections. Their titles and original publication dates are detailed below:

Teeing off in Tashkent – 19th April 2005

(Interview)

Uzbekistan, Great Britain and the Ousting of Craig Murray – June 23rd

(Article)

Uzbek forces open fire on protesters – 14th May 2005

(Interview)

Pressure Uzbekistan on rights – June 18th 2005

(Article)

Uzbeks Protest at British Envoy’s Sacking – 29th October 2004

(Article)

View with comments