Thursday, February 05, 2009
Hiding the evidence
Everybody must be concerned by accusations that the government is hiding behind claims of a threat to national security to suppress evidence of torture by the CIA on a prisoner still held in Guantánamo Bay that emerged from a high court ruling earlier this week.
The ruling blamed the US, with British connivance, for keeping the "powerful evidence" secret, sparking criticism from lawyers, campaigners and MPs, who claimed the government had capitulated to American bullying:
Two senior judges said they were powerless to reveal the information about the torture of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian-born British resident, because David Miliband, the foreign secretary, had warned the court the US was threatening to stop sharing intelligence about terrorism with the UK.
In a scathing judgment, Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones said the evidence, and what MI5 knew about it, must remain secret because according to Miliband, the American threats meant "the public of the United Kingdom would be put at risk".
The judges made clear they were unhappy with their decision, but said they had no alternative as a result of Miliband's claim. Their ruling revealed that Miliband stuck to his position about the threat to the UK even after Barack Obama signed orders two weeks ago banning torture and announcing the closure of the Guantánamo Bay prison camp.
I think that we have long suspected that Orwell's description of Britain as a satellite state of a greater American empire might have some merit in it, but surely nobody had expected to have our paranoia confirmed so openly by the courts and the government.
The ruling blamed the US, with British connivance, for keeping the "powerful evidence" secret, sparking criticism from lawyers, campaigners and MPs, who claimed the government had capitulated to American bullying:
Two senior judges said they were powerless to reveal the information about the torture of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian-born British resident, because David Miliband, the foreign secretary, had warned the court the US was threatening to stop sharing intelligence about terrorism with the UK.
In a scathing judgment, Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones said the evidence, and what MI5 knew about it, must remain secret because according to Miliband, the American threats meant "the public of the United Kingdom would be put at risk".
The judges made clear they were unhappy with their decision, but said they had no alternative as a result of Miliband's claim. Their ruling revealed that Miliband stuck to his position about the threat to the UK even after Barack Obama signed orders two weeks ago banning torture and announcing the closure of the Guantánamo Bay prison camp.
I think that we have long suspected that Orwell's description of Britain as a satellite state of a greater American empire might have some merit in it, but surely nobody had expected to have our paranoia confirmed so openly by the courts and the government.
Comments:
<< Home
All through the 80s I never thought that a Labour government could be such a disaster, nor such a danger to civil liberties.
I was asked todaay at work why I supported the Lib Dems - the answer was easy, they don't condone torture, they don't want the useless white elephant of id cards and they didn't support Bush in invading Iraq. Easy really.
Labour? Shame.
Post a Comment
I was asked todaay at work why I supported the Lib Dems - the answer was easy, they don't condone torture, they don't want the useless white elephant of id cards and they didn't support Bush in invading Iraq. Easy really.
Labour? Shame.
# posted by 
: 12:06 AM
: 12:06 AM<< Home
