Human rights groups to boycott inquiry into British torture and rendition

Liberty says Gibson torture inquiry will be ‘waste of time and money’ because it lacks credibility and transparency Lawyers and human rights groups are to boycott the inquiry into the UK’s alleged role in torture and rendition since the 9/11 terror attacks because they say it lacks credibility and transparency and arrangements for it are “secretive, unfair and deeply flawed”. Key sessions will be held in secret and the cabinet secretary will have the final say over what information is made public. Those who alleged they were subject to torture and rendition will not be able to question MI5 or MI6 officers, nor will foreign intelligence agencies be questioned. The decision not to participate, reported by the Guardian last month , was confirmed in a joint letter to the solicitor for the inquiry , which will be run by the retired judge Sir Peter Gibson. Ten groups including Liberty , Reprieve and Amnesty International said they did not intend to submit any evidence or attend any further meetings with the inquiry team. They said the inquiry’s protocol and terms of reference showed it would not have the “credibility or transparency” to ensure “the truth about allegations that UK authorities were involved in the mistreatment of detainees held abroad” was brought to light. The human rights groups said the inquiry would not comply with the government’s international obligations to investigate torture. Lawyers representing former detainees have also complained about the nature of the inquiry, which was initially welcomed when it was announced by David Cameron last year. Former detainees and their lawyers will not be able to question intelligence officials and all evidence from current or former members of the security and intelligence agencies, below the level of head, will be heard in private. The inquiry will not start until the end of a current police investigation. The human rights groups say in their letter: “We are particularly disappointed that the issue of what material may be disclosed to the public will not be determined independently of government and, further, that there will be no meaningful participation of the former and current detainees and other interested third parties. “As you know, we were keen to assist the inquiry in the vital work of establishing the truth about allegations that UK authorities were involved in the mistreatment of detainees held abroad. Our strong view, however, is that the process currently proposed does not have the credibility or transparency to achieve this.” A second letter, written jointly by Imran Khan and other lawyers representing former Guantánamo Bay detainees, said: “We consider it impossible to advise those whom we represent that the structure and protocols now confirmed for the Gibson inquiry can achieve what are essential ingredients for a public inquiry into grave state crimes,” Detainees would not even know “if the individuals being questioned are the right ones”. The lack of input for detainees, “simply serves to demonstrate that there is no comprehension on the part of the government of the gravity of the crimes which representatives of the state may have committed”, they said. “We had hoped as lawyers to assist in a transparent exercise of vital importance. It is a matter of profound regret that our assessment is that the inquiry does not provide the means by which this can be realised. “In the absence of there being any alteration to the protocols, our advice is compelled to be that it is inappropriate for our clients to submit evidence.” Several high-profile human rights lawyers signed the letter, including Louise Christian, Irene Nembhard, Gareth Peirce, Tayab Ali and Imran Khan. Amnesty’s UK policy advisor, Tara Lyle, said: “This is a desperately needed inquiry into extremely serious allegations but the arrangements for it are secretive, unfair and deeply flawed. We need an inquiry that is as open and effective as possible, not this semi-secret process that lacks scope and ambition. “Those that suffered terrible abuse are set to be let down by this inquiry, while the general public is likely to be denied the opportunity to learn what went wrong during this dark chapter in our history.” Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said: “If this inquiry proceeds without the participation of the victims it will be nothing more than a waste of time and public money. Until a credible, independent process is established this shameful chapter of the war on terror continues.” Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former foreign secretary who chairs the intelligence and security committee appointed by the prime minister, denied the inquiry was secretive and said the campaigners were being unrealistic. He told BBC Radio 4′s Today programme: “I cannot recollect an inquiry that’s been proposed to be so open as we’re having in this particular case. When was the last time the head of MI5 and the head of MI6 – the prime minister has made quite clear – can be summoned to this inquiry and be required to give evidence?” There had to be “some element of trust” when the authorities were dealing with top secret information, he said. A statement from the inquiry said the decision by solicitors and human rights groups was regrettable and said it was hoped they would reconsider. “The inquiry will go ahead,” the statement said. “It will examine the relevant documentation held by government. It will hear the key government witnesses. The inquiry offers the detainees and anyone else with evidence relevant to its terms of reference the only opportunity for them to give evidence to an independent inquiry. “The detainees and the NGOs have alleged the involvement or awareness of the UK government and its security and intelligence services in relation to the mistreatment and rendition of detainees held by other countries. The inquiry would welcome such evidence.” Torture Human rights Global terrorism Terrorism policy UK security and terrorism CIA rendition Guantánamo Bay Amnesty International James Meikle guardian.co.uk

Posted by on August 4, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.