Torture: the 10 claims against the Army
Jenny Booth
June 13, 2007
Lawyers for Baha Musa claimed today that the case had uncovered evidence that the Government approved the systematic torture of detainees.
Today a panel of five law lords ruled that Mr Musa, a hotel receptionist who died of multiple injuries after two nights in British military custody, was entitled to the protection of the UK's Human Rights Act while held by British soldiers.
The verdict has set a precedent that the rights of foreign detainees abroad must be protected against torture and abuse in the same way as British citizens in the UK.
But the Musa case is also predicted to have a heavy political fallout when it is remitted to the divisional court of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court.
Today Phil Shiner, a lawyer for the Musa family, alleged that evidence had emerged at the court martial that high levels of the army and the Government were complicit in a systematic policy of torturing detainees in British military custody.
Mr Shiner claimed that the Government had since been trying to cover up the "shocking new revelations" which emerged in the six and a half month court case, including that:
* The UK had dropped the 1972 ban imposed by the Heath Government on hooding, stressing, sleep deprivation, food deprivation and noise
* The UK had a written policy allowing hooding which reflected verbal and written Nato policy
* UK interrogators and tactical questioners were trained to hood, stress and sleep deprive at the Defence, Intelligence and Security Centre at Chicksands in Bedfordshire
* It was standard practice for all battle groups to hood
* Up to three sandbags or even old plastic cement bags were used in temperatures of 140F
* Many other Iraqis have been killed and tortured in UK custody
* The Attorney-General advised that the HRA did not apply and soldiers need follow only lower legal standards
* The medical profession was certifying detainees as fit to sustain hooding, stressing and other ill-treatment
* Army doctors did nothing to protect injured detainees and actually instigated abuse themselves
* Even when Musa died, after being hooded for most of the 36 hours he survived, there was huge resistance at the highest levels to stopping hooding because of pressure from the US.
"To date the UK Government has managed to suppress much of this material, including all the bundles of documents and evidence from the court martial, and a shocking video showing hooded and cuffed detainees being verbally and physically abused as they were man-handled into the UK’s preferred stress position," said Mr Shiner.
"The implications of this case are enormous."
In response to today’s ruling by the House of Lords, Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, welcomed the ruling which he said provided "helpful clarification of the precise legal framework under which UK forces operated overseas".
"As the Chief of General Staff has already said, Baha Musa died after being held in UK custody and was subject to an unlawful conditioning process," said Mr Browne.
"We have never argued that the treatment of Baha Musa was acceptable or that his death should not have been investigated.
"Credible allegations of serious wrong-doing have to be, and are, investigated. Where evidence is independently assessed as justifying a prosecution, the application of a robust, fair system of military justice must follow."
Mr Browne said that the Musa case was not closed. "As is normal in any case of this nature, the case is currently being reviewed by the Royal Military Police and Army Prosecuting Authority. They will determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought."
The Defence Secretary did not respond directly to the allegation that the "unlawful conditioning process" was UK military policy approved by the Government at the time.
He went on: "Since 2003 we have reviewed our practices in relation to detention, and where necessary made changes. This is a complex judgment, some 60 pages long, and needs careful consideration. However if further lessons or action needs to be taken on board as a result of this judgement we will do so."
Jenny Booth
June 13, 2007
Lawyers for Baha Musa claimed today that the case had uncovered evidence that the Government approved the systematic torture of detainees.
Today a panel of five law lords ruled that Mr Musa, a hotel receptionist who died of multiple injuries after two nights in British military custody, was entitled to the protection of the UK's Human Rights Act while held by British soldiers.
The verdict has set a precedent that the rights of foreign detainees abroad must be protected against torture and abuse in the same way as British citizens in the UK.
But the Musa case is also predicted to have a heavy political fallout when it is remitted to the divisional court of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court.
Today Phil Shiner, a lawyer for the Musa family, alleged that evidence had emerged at the court martial that high levels of the army and the Government were complicit in a systematic policy of torturing detainees in British military custody.
Mr Shiner claimed that the Government had since been trying to cover up the "shocking new revelations" which emerged in the six and a half month court case, including that:
* The UK had dropped the 1972 ban imposed by the Heath Government on hooding, stressing, sleep deprivation, food deprivation and noise
* The UK had a written policy allowing hooding which reflected verbal and written Nato policy
* UK interrogators and tactical questioners were trained to hood, stress and sleep deprive at the Defence, Intelligence and Security Centre at Chicksands in Bedfordshire
* It was standard practice for all battle groups to hood
* Up to three sandbags or even old plastic cement bags were used in temperatures of 140F
* Many other Iraqis have been killed and tortured in UK custody
* The Attorney-General advised that the HRA did not apply and soldiers need follow only lower legal standards
* The medical profession was certifying detainees as fit to sustain hooding, stressing and other ill-treatment
* Army doctors did nothing to protect injured detainees and actually instigated abuse themselves
* Even when Musa died, after being hooded for most of the 36 hours he survived, there was huge resistance at the highest levels to stopping hooding because of pressure from the US.
"To date the UK Government has managed to suppress much of this material, including all the bundles of documents and evidence from the court martial, and a shocking video showing hooded and cuffed detainees being verbally and physically abused as they were man-handled into the UK’s preferred stress position," said Mr Shiner.
"The implications of this case are enormous."
In response to today’s ruling by the House of Lords, Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, welcomed the ruling which he said provided "helpful clarification of the precise legal framework under which UK forces operated overseas".
"As the Chief of General Staff has already said, Baha Musa died after being held in UK custody and was subject to an unlawful conditioning process," said Mr Browne.
"We have never argued that the treatment of Baha Musa was acceptable or that his death should not have been investigated.
"Credible allegations of serious wrong-doing have to be, and are, investigated. Where evidence is independently assessed as justifying a prosecution, the application of a robust, fair system of military justice must follow."
Mr Browne said that the Musa case was not closed. "As is normal in any case of this nature, the case is currently being reviewed by the Royal Military Police and Army Prosecuting Authority. They will determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought."
The Defence Secretary did not respond directly to the allegation that the "unlawful conditioning process" was UK military policy approved by the Government at the time.
He went on: "Since 2003 we have reviewed our practices in relation to detention, and where necessary made changes. This is a complex judgment, some 60 pages long, and needs careful consideration. However if further lessons or action needs to be taken on board as a result of this judgement we will do so."
