Torture guidance may leave officers ‘open to prosecution’
By politics.co.uk staff
The government’s guidelines for British agents’ approach to detainees they suspect of being subject to torture are insufficient to protect them from prosecution, a human rights watchdog has warned.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has written to David Cameron, arguing that the current guidelines for operatives, issued in July, may mislead them into thinking they are legally protected.
In the letter, the EHRC warned that under the guidelines, which forbid British officers from interviewing or extracting intelligence from suspects they suspect have been or will be tortured by a foreign power, still allow them to go ahead even when there is a “serious risk” of torture.
It wrote that the guidelines “may leave [officers] with the erroneous expectation that they will be protected from personal criminal liability in situations where they may, unwittingly, be liable for crimes committed and condoned by others.”
The commission threatened the government with judicial review proceedings if it does not respond and make the desired changes.
“The government now has the opportunity to bring its guidance within the law so that the intelligence service itself and its individual officers do not unwittingly leave themselves open to costly and time-consuming court action”, John Wadham, the EHRC’s legal director, said.
The news brings the issue of Britain’s role in allegations of torture overseas to the fore, after high-profile cases such as that of Briton Binyam Mohammed who was allegedly tortured in Pakistan with the complicity of British agents.
The government maintains that British officers do not have any role, directly or indirectly, in torture, and that the current guidelines stand in line with both Britain’s domestic laws and international obligations.
The man conducting the government’s review of anti-terror legislation, Lord Carlile, criticised the EHRC’s threat of legal action, telling the Today programme: “What I’m concerned about is the use of taxpayers’ money by the EHRC to sue the government.
“We are talking here about precious resources, taxpayers’ money. Spending potentially a vast amount of money on suing the government on this subject is not in my view a good use of the EHRC’s money.”
