REDRESS is a human rights organisation that helps torture survivors obtain justice and reparation. REDRESS works with survivors to help restore their dignity and to make torturers accountable.

UK COMPENSATION PAYOUT TO TORTURE VICTIMS

London 17 November 2010. The UK Government’s decision to pay compensation to 16 men held by US forces at Guantanamo Bay should not limit scrutiny of possible UK complicity in the alleged mistreatment and torture of individuals detained during security activities post 9/11, REDRESS said today.

On the contrary, the settlement underscores the imperative for a full and thorough judicial investigation into the role of UK officials and the security services relating to these men and others apparently subject to illegal treatment during counter-terrorism investigations, REDRESS believes.

REDRESS’ Director, Carla Ferstman, said: “It is important that these individuals have received compensation. From REDRESS’ experience of dealing with torture survivors we know that such abuse has lasting impact on their lives. However, the fact of the settlement must not detract from the obvious need for public scrutiny of these issues.”

The compensation announcement made yesterday by the UK’s Secretary of State for Justice, Kenneth Clarke, brings to an end an important claim for damages before the High Court in London brought by 12 of the men, including Bisher al-Rawi, Jamil el Banna, Richard Belmar, Omar Deghayes, Binyam Mohamed and Martin Mubanga. Lawyers for the men argued UK officials were involved in their transfer to the US detention centre and should have taken steps to prevent this and their alleged ill-treatment. In agreeing compensation the UK government made no admission that it knew about the alleged mistreatment or that it took place.

Ms Ferstman added: “These are matters of grave public concern. That fact that they will not now be examined in the High Court does not negate the need for all issues and accusations regarding UK complicity in torture to be examined in a transparent and judicial forum.

“Torture is never acceptable; it is illegal; it doesn’t work and no self-respecting country would be part of it. It is therefore important for the issue of complicity to be fully examined, so that we can be sure our security forces are acting in a way that is in accordance with UK and international law.”

Britain’s Prime Minister, David Cameron, said in July that a judge-led inquiry would be established to examine whether, and if so to what extent, the UK government and its intelligence agencies were involved in improper treatment of detainees held by other countries in counter-terrorism operations overseas, or were aware of improper treatment of detainees in operations in which the UK was involved.

REDRESS welcomes the inquiry, which is expected to be lead by Sir Peter Gibson, but believes it essential the inquiry has the legal power to ensure all the facts are considered. Earlier this year, REDRESS joined eight human rights organisations in writing to Sir Peter calling for a prompt, independent and impartial inquiry that would hear the evidence of alleged victims. The inquiry should have the power to compel the disclosure of relevant documents as well as to require a person give evidence, the joint letter said.

European Court case underscores responsibilities of UK army to respect human rights of detainees : Case of Al Sadoon and Mufdhi v The United Kingdom (Application no.61498/08)

On 4 October 2010, the European Court of Human Rights' decision in this case became final - the Court determined that the UK Government breached the European Convention when UK army officials in Basra transfered two Iraqis, Faisal Al Saadoon and Khalaf Mufdhi to Iraqi custody where they faced a real risk of death by hanging. The two Iraqi men were detained and held without charge in Basra by the British army in 2003, and after some three years were alleged to have been involved in the deaths of two British soldiers; in May 2006 they were charged with murder and war crimes and were due to be transferred to the custoy of the Iraqi High Tribunal. The UK army then handed Al Saadoon and Mufdhi over to the Iraqi authorities despite an injunction issued by the European Court telling them not to do so.

This case is important because it underscores that the UK had far-reaching obligations to the two men even though the UK was holding them in Iraq and the transfer was to Iraqi officials – if there is a real risk of torture and/or other prohibited ill-treatment, the European Court is clear that there can be no transfer. This case sends an important message to all states carrying out military action in foreign countries: if you are detaining individuals, not only must you ensure that detention conditions and the treatment meted out accords with applicable human rights standards, in addition, you cannot transfer detainees to the care of the local authorities unless it is clear that they do not face a real risk of torture and/or other prohibited ill-treatment. For more information on this case, see our special page on this case.

Victims relieved at decision to resume Lubanga trial

REDRESS welcomes today’s judgment from the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court lifting the stay of proceedings in the trial against Mr. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. REDRESS' Director said: “we are extremely relieved to see that this very landmark trial may finally resume. This is important for victims who feared that they would lose their chance at justice. While today’s judgment means that Mr. Lubanga’s case is back on track, the fact that it was at the point of collapse is very worrying – we hope the problems which led to this impasse can be fully addressed so that this and other trials are not inappropriately placed at risk. Protracted delays in this first case before the ICC have contributed to victims’ sense of hopelessness. Those who suffered the terrible events in Ituri deserve a full and fair consideration of these allegations and have waited a long time for it.”

The full text of our statement, issued on 8 October 2010 is available here.