Fabricating Terrorism - Executive Summary
03/29/06 "Caged
Prisoners" -- --
In her briefing on The State Department's 2005 Country Reports
on Human Rights Practices, released 9th March 2006, Condoleezza
Rice declared America’s destined role on the international stage
to the world’s media:
‘Our promotion of human rights and democracy is in keeping with
America's most cherished principles and it helps to lay the
foundation for lasting peace in the world … The duty to defend
human rights and to help spread democracies' blessings is
especially great for the United States and other free nations …
We must help struggling democracies deliver on the high hopes of
their citizens for a better life. We must call countries to
account when they retreat from their human rights commitments
and we must always stand in solidarity with the courageous men
and women across the globe who live in fear, yet dream of
freedom.’ [1]
1. Why has Fabricating Terrorism: Britain’s role in
Rendition and Torture been published now?
Those organizations and individuals defending human rights in
the areas of law and politics, especially post 9/11, may have
found their experiences at odds with the above hymn to America.
It is as a corrective to a steady stream of propaganda by both
American and British authorities that Cageprisoners has released
its own report: Fabricating Terrorism: British Complicity in
Renditions and Torture aims at uncovering the underside of
American and British commitment to uphold and spread ‘human
rights’.
Debates around rendition and the use of torture are
intensifying with eyewitness accounts of released detainees,
interviews with disaffected intelligence officers, and
information gathered from various sources by human rights
groups, lawyers, and journalists. As a result a political
momentum is building with investigations at National and
European Parliamentary levels [2] : law
reform demands to curb rendition or torture flights;
[3] official Police investigations [4]
; court cases by former British detainees, and campaigns
lobbying for the release of detainees.
2. Researching Rendition and Torture
Fabricating Terrorism: British Complicity in Renditions
and Torture has been compiled against a backdrop of
misinformation, censorship and silence. Partial information by
the British and American governments (based on legal threats),
was eventually released as a damage limitation exercise.
[5]
The numbers of renditions which have taken place since 2001
has been extremely difficult to quantify as both US and British
governments have refused to respond to requests by different
organisations. [6]
3. Rendition – a definition
“Well it all depends on what you mean by rendition. If it
is something that is unlawful I totally disapprove of it; if it
is lawful, I don't disapprove of it.”
[7] Tony Blair.
Fabricating Terrorism: British Complicity in Renditions
and Torture states plainly that rendition and extraordinary
rendition are illegal and that the British Government’s position
purposely misinterprets the law to cloak its underhand
practices. The only legal transfer recognised by international
law, such as the United Nations conventions, is extradition.
Rendition, however, is described as the transfer of individual(s)
from one State to another without recourse to due process of
either country involved, or under the regulatory influence of
internationally recognised laws. [8] The
intensified use of rendition after 9/11, the dossier points out,
was a unilateral decision by the USA to pursue its policy of the
‘Global War on Terror’ which allowed ‘intelligence gathering’,
without safeguards protecting individuals.
Rendition - Torture
The report describes how detainees are often transferred to
third-party countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, Morocco, Jordan,
Libya and Afghanistan with appalling track records on human
rights. Organisations such as Amnesty International, Human
Rights Watch and even State Department annual Country Reports
have all highlighted wide spread abuses and torture in these
countries.
4. Findings of the Report
Despite initial reassurances from the British government
denying any involvement in rendition and torture, evidence
contradicting these statements has been emerging:
- Rendition Flights . CIA chartered aircraft used
in the process of rendition have been allowed into British
airspace post 9/11 utilising airport facilities as shown in
documentation supplied by plane spotters and human rights
activists. Just one example is of the infamous ‘Guantanamo
Bay Express’, which made several trips between Cairo and
Prestwick in December 2001, as well a trip to Uzbekistan
[9] . Further evidence is laid out in the report which
seriously undermines the British authority’s denials on
aiding rendition flights.
- Involvement of British Intelligence Services.
Case studies are presented to show the degrees of
culpability British authorities were involved in the
rendition process and eventual torture. Cases such as Binyam
Mohammed Al Habashi highlight British intelligence agencies
sending questionable ‘intelligence’ that would have a
bearing on Binyam’s fate – rendition and subsequent torture
when rendered to Morocco. In the case of Jamil El Banna and
Bisher Al Rawi British intelligence requested Gambian
security forces pick up the pair and interrogate them – thus
the use of the phrase ‘outsourcing torture’.
- Unwillingness of Foreign Office and Diplomats to
represent British citizens and residents. Case studies
show civil servants’ awareness of the precarious state that
the detainees were held in and allowed them to continue to
suffer.
5. Impact of British Complicity in rendition and torture
Apart from the life-destroying affect on the detainees
themselves the British government’s actions reverberate at both
domestic and international levels.
International Level
By opting out of internationally agreed laws which Britain
initially signed up to there is an increasing risk that other
countries will not take their obligations on human rights
seriously. Britain’s claims of leading the worldwide promotion
of human rights [10] are largely
undermined by the Government’s political double-dealings. Opting
out of international law and the deployment of Diplomatic
Assurances and the Memorandum of Agreements in order to
legitimise the transfer of suspects to brutal and unpopular
regimes is highly controversial. These assurances and agreements
against the use of torture have no legal grounding and cannot be
effectively enforced.
Domestic Level
The British government, in neglecting its responsibilities
towards British citizens and especially British residents
granted permanent leave to stay in the UK, threatens to alienate
a sizeable portion of the British population. Whilst in custody
Moazzam Begg summed up the attitude the British authorities had
towards him when he explains the moment they allowed him to be
rendered to Kandahar, Afghanistan from Pakistan,
This was a side of Britain that I’d never seen … ‘He’s
just a Paki they probably thought. That’s what I thought too’
[11]
6. Recommendations
Fabricating Terrorism: British Complicity in Renditions
and Torture recommends the following measures:
- Government complicity in acts relating to rendition must
be effectively halted.
- Rendition flights involving CIA chartered planes should
be refused entry into British airspace, and banned from
using facilities at UK airports. Information on all previous
flights relating to renditions should be handed over to the
relevant Parliamentary Committees forthwith and not withheld
to avoid embarrassment to the Government.
- The British intelligence agencies must cease complicity
in illegal interrogations involving torture, and have no
dealings with the use of intelligence gleaned from torture.
The roles of the foreign office and the diplomatic service
have come under suspicion and must be investigated.
- It is essential that the British Government should fully
respect its obligations to international law regarding human
rights abuses. If it suspects the use of torture it must be
reported to the appropriate authorities for thorough
independent investigation
It is the responsibility of lawyers, politicians and
ultimately the public to force an end to Britain’s role in these
illegal and dangerous practices.
[1] See the State Department’s website
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2006/62738.htm
[2] In the UK the ‘All parliamentary
Group on Extraordinary Renditions’ and Council of Europe
investigation headed by Dick Marty
[3] The amendment, tabled to the Civil
Aviation Bill by Baroness d’Souza, will be debated in the Lords
on 28 March – it will allow the Secretary of State to force any
suspicious aircraft in UK airspace to land and that plane to be
searched
[4]
http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/press/2005/acpo-investigates-extraordinary-rendition.shtml
[5] 23rd Feb 2006 Federal
Court ruling forced the Pentagon to part with detainee list
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002074552
‘Minister admits ‘rendition’ planes used RAF bases, 7th
March 2006. This relates to Adam Ingram, armed forces minister,
written comments.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,1725223,00.html
[6] Mayer, “Outsourcing Torture”, the New
Yorker, 14 Feb.2005, cited in “ Extraordinary Rendition”,
Wikipedia Encyclopedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition
[7] Prime Minister’s Morning Press
Conference, 22nd December 2005
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page8834.asp
[8] See Articles 5, 9, 12 and 13 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
[9] Uzbekistan is subject of a damning
report by the State Department on human rights abuses, and was
where former British Ambassador Craig Murray was recalled by the
government for whistleblowing on US and UK complicity in torture
[10] As in the UK signing up to Optional
Protocol to the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) December
2003
[11] Enemy Combatant: A British
Mulism’s Journey to Guantanamo and Back, Moazzam Begg, Simon
and Schuster, London, 2006
