The coalition government announced it will hold an inquiry into a string of cases in which Britain is accused of being complicit in the torture of detainees - but how substantial will this move be for human rights and justice for the innocent victims? Peter Apps reports…

He had already been deprived of sleep for six days. Then he was stripped naked and whipped with a length of rubber attached to a wooden stick. Finally, a fingernail was gripped with pliers, twisted and yanked right out. When he returned to the UK, three of his fingernails were missing.

'He had already been deprived of sleep for six days. Then he was stripped naked and whipped with a length of rubber attached to a wooden stick. Finally, a fingernail was gripped with pliers, twisted and yanked right out. When he returned to the UK, three of his fingernails were missing'

Rangzieb Ahmed claims that this was the torture he suffered in Pakistan, before he was convicted of terrorism offences in a British court. In a report by the Joint Committee of Human Rights, he alleged that he was interviewed by UK officials during his detention. Tory MP David Davis also claimed the Pakistani authorities were tipped off by British intelligence and advised to detain Rangzeib Ahmed.

This is one of a string of cases in which Britain is accused of being complicit in torture. In July this year, the coalition government announced it will hold an inquiry into these allegations. But this may not be a cause of celebration for fans of human rights. Campaigners have reacted with caution, Shami Chakrabati of Liberty raising fears that the government was “bending towards the security establishment”.

In some ways the government has, to use an unfortunate phrase, had its arm twisted into launching this inquiry. A case brought by former Guantanamo bay detainees threatened to hit the government with a huge compensation claim. Perhaps more significantly, judges hearing this case ruled that it could not be held in private, and announced that evidence from the CIA would be made public.

The US reacted furiously to this and threatened to end intelligence sharing agreements with Britain. Whether this was an empty threat or not we will never know, but it was enough to persuade David Cameron to promise legislation preventing this kind of evidence being made public.

He then offered the 12 detainees £10million compensation to keep their case out of court and pave the way for the inquiry. But an inquiry, unlike a court case, operates on the government’s terms.

'Will the torture inquiry be free from those sorts of ‘measures’? With the CIA already angered by the court cases, they are likely to watch the inquiry closely. We can only hope that this doesn’t affect its independence, and in turn, that the true extent of the UK’s involvement into what happened in dark cells across the world (all in the name of fighting terror) won’t always remain secret'

Despite Britain’s responsibility under international law to make complicity in torture a criminal offence, the inquiry will not lead to any prosecutions. It will also be unable to examine foreign evidence, which is a huge stumbling block given that all the allegations relate to incidents overseas.

Further, former ministers, who may carry the ultimate responsibility for the policies which led to the allegations, will not be called before the inquiry or held to account. All significant motivations, then, for the government to prefer an inquiry if it means these cases are kept out of the courtroom. £10million in compensation may seem something of a bargain.

Parallels have been drawn with the still open Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war. However, among the diplomatic documents released last week by Wikileaks, were some interesting revelations about that inquiry. According to the leaked documents, John Day of the Ministry of Defence, promised the US that measures would be put in place to protect their interests. 

Will the torture inquiry be free from those sorts of ‘measures’? With the CIA already angered by the court cases, they are likely to watch the inquiry closely. We can only hope that this doesn’t affect its independence, and in turn, that the true extent of the UK’s involvement into what happened in dark cells across the world (all in the name of fighting terror) won’t always remain secret.

Words: Peter Apps
Photo: Courtesy of Adrian Nettleship, taken as part of Ctrl.Alt.Shift's Guantanamo Bay feature, which can be read in our Corruption magazine issue. For sale, here.

For more information on the torture inquiry, the British Nationals held Pakistan and their claims, click here and here (chapter 2).