Europe

Home page

Europe

Whingeing Miliband: In an extraordinary letter, he lashes out at judge who said Britain colluded in torture

12 February 2010 23:31 (UTC +04:00)

Baku â€“ APA. Foreign Secretary David Miliband last night condemned critics including a senior judge who have accused British security services of colluding in torture, APA reports quoting dailymail.co.uk web-page.
In a remarkable open letter with Home Secretary Alan Johnson, he said it was ’disgraceful’ to suggest that the UK aided or turned a blind eye to it.
The move follows a court ruling this week which concluded that MI5 knew British resident Binyam Mohamed was being subjected to ’cruel, inhuman and degrading’ treatment by CIA interrogators in Afghanistan in 2002.
Mr Miliband’s attempt to stop the publication of intelligence detailing this information had been rejected.
Despite their protestations, the two ministers admitted that operating guidance to British intelligence officers had been changed at some point after 9/11 when it ’became clear’ that the CIA had ’changed the rules of engagement’.
And the letter leaves open the possibility that British officers may have colluded in torture for a period immediately following the invasion
of Afghanistan in 2001. Mr Miliband and Mr Johnson have been angered by suggestions in the wake of this week’s court ruling that Britain was still complicit in torture.
Their letter claims that the allegations are ’not just unfair on the staff concerned, but dangerous for the country’.
It adds: ’The allegation that our security and intelligence agencies have licence to collude in torture is disgraceful, untrue and one that we vigorously deny.’
But Liberal Democrat Ed Davey last night said it ’raises more questions than it answers’ and underlined the need for a judicial inquiry into exactly who knew torture was taking place.
Many observers believe that ministers, possibly including Tony Blair, must have signed off any British involvement.
Mr Davey said it was ’pathetic’ for ministers to try to deny past involvement in torture by insisting that British security officers were not involved now.
’No one is saying this is going on now,’ he said.
’The accusation is a very clear and simple one, that there is now evidence that at the time some people in the security services knew the Americans were torturing.
The question is what did they do about it, who did they tell and how many more cases were there?
’Angry protestations about what is happening now do not us any nearer to the truth.’ The White House yesterday said it was ’deeply disappointed’ by the Appeal Court ruling that released U.S. intelligence on Mohamed.
Spokesman Ben LaBolt said it would make intelligence sharing with Britain more difficult in future.
’We shared this information in confidence and with certain expectations,’ he said.
’As we warned, the court’s judgment will complicate the confidentiality of our intelligence-sharing relationship with the UK, and it will have to factor into our decision-making going forward.’
The letter is an implicit rebuke to one of Britain’s most senior judges, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, who wrote a withering assessment of the attitude of MI5 towards torture.
Lord Neuberger effectively accused the security agency of complicity in torture and of having a culture of disregarding human rights.
His explosive assessment came in response to a rejected attempt by Mr Miliband to stop publication of seven paragraphs of intelligence detailing evidence of MI5’s knowledge that Mohamed had been tortured.
Mohamed, 31, an Ethiopian granted refugee status in Britain in 1994, claimed he was tortured while being held on suspicion of involvement in terrorism.
He was detained in Afghanistan in 2001 and later transferred to Guantanamo Bay, accused of involvement in al Qaeda, which he denies.
Mr Miliband says in the letter that the new guidance to intelligence officers was meant to ’make clear their responsibilities not just to avoid any involvement or complicity in unacceptable practice, but also to report on them’.