%20(2).png)
The 30th October 2015 marked the painfully overdue release of Shaker Aamer, the last British detainee at the infamous Guantanamo Bay detention centre. Aamer was cleared for release by six American security agencies in 2007, yet was only reunited with his family a couple of months ago. He was not charged with any crime. Aamer joins a long list of victims of the feebleness of civil liberties in the face of the ‘war on terror’.
For the British, however, Aamer is distinct from the hundreds of other detainees at Guantanamo. He alleged upon release that British security service agents knew about his interrogation and were in the room while he was physically abused by US officials. He also alleged to have seen MI5 agents aggressively interrogating others. Aamer’s release has rekindled the debate over the UK’s involvement in torture at Guantanamo, and rightly so.
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), to which the UK is a State party, reads: ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. According to Article 15 of the Convention, this is a non-derogable right, meaning that the UK cannot limit or outlaw this right in any situation. The UK is also a State party to the Convention Against Torture (CAT), which outlaws complicity in torture in Article 4. These international treaties protect individuals like Shaker Aamer from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Or so it would seem.
“Guantanamo is being run by one concept: how to destroy a human being.” Shaker Aamer
Aamer alleged that MI5 agents knew that he was being physically coerced into giving a confession. He also alleged that they were in the room, witnessing his head being repeatedly cracked against a wall at Bagram. The ‘enhanced interrogation methods’ used by US interrogators - including sleep-deprivation, waterboarding, hooding, stress positions and desecrating the Qu’ran – are not approved methods by the UK. Yet the knowledge of such methods taking place, according to Article 4 of CAT, is tantamount to a violation of Aamer’s right to not be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Complicity or participation in torture constitutes involvement. The UK is also obliged, under CAT Article 16, to take all necessary measures to prevent torture taking place with the acquiescence of their public officials. But Aamer’s allegations remain just that: allegations. Or do they?
The Detainee Enquiry – Marking their own Homework?
In December 2013 the Report of the Detainee Enquiry published its findings on the treatment of those detained in the charge of the UK’s security services. Before I disclose these findings, it is important to establish the contentious aspects of this report.
Its transparency was non-existent; the Government reserved the right to decide what documents the investigation published, and refused to allow detainees to testify. David Cameron then cut the investigation short, taking control of it away from an independent panel and handing it to the Intelligence and Security Committee – the very entity he claimed in 2010 was unfit for the job. This represents a violation of Article 12 of CAT, which obligates States to conduct an impartial investigation into allegations of torture. The report has an air of marking its own homework, and its findings are therefore tainted with bias.
Nevertheless, the Detainee Enquiry found that both MI5 and MI6 officers were complicit in the torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees at various locations, including Guantanamo. The Enquiry held that these complicit security services agents were reluctant to question the ‘enhanced interrogation tactics’ for fear of damaging liaison relations with the US. Despite the obvious lack of impartiality, the report still found that the UK was complicit in the torture of detainees, representing a violation of international human rights law. It begs the question: what would have been found if it was a truly independent enquiry?
“Human beings naturally hate to torture other human beings. Many of the soldiers were doing the job reluctantly and were very happy when ordered to stop. Of course, there are sick people everywhere in the world who enjoy seeing people suffer.” Mohamed Ould Slahi, former detainee and author of Guantanamo Diary
Aamer’s case is not an isolated incident. In 2010, a civil claim was brought before the High Court by ex-detainees at Guantanamo. Led by Binyam Mohamed, the group alleged that UK agents had not only known about the extreme interrogation taking place, but that they had facilitated torture by supplying US agents with information on their education, pictures of their family members and details of their personal lives. The group also alleged that they had in fact been directly mistreated by MI5 agents.
The Government attempted to hold these court sessions in private, which the High Court rejected. The case very quickly went away as a result of the decision to hold an open court session in which the State would have to provide classified information, instead opting for a hefty out-of-court settlement of £1,000,000 plus for each claimant. While the Government is entitled to keep its security documents secret, this serves as a fairly clear indication of the mistreatment that the UK sanctioned.
“If they are all not torture, then what is torture? Let’s define torture, let’s let the world know what it means to be tortured.” Shaker Aamer
The UK has evidently violated international human rights law. It has admittedly violated CAT Article 4 in being complicit in the mistreatment and possible torture of detainees, including British nationals. It has not taken measures to prevent this mistreatment and possible torture, despite MI5 and MI6 agents being well aware of its taking place, consequently violating CAT Article 16. Its investigation of torture allegations, the Detainee Enquiry, lacked transparency and neutrality, violating CAT Article 12. The UK’s involvement with the mistreatment of Guantanamo detainees appears to be extensive. What is less clear, however, is the truth behind claims that MI5 agents conducted the mistreatment themselves. Regardless, it is important not to shun responsibility for the camp and simply designate it an American problem. It might be pertinent here to call for the speedy publication of the Chilcot Report were it not for a total lack of faith in both its release and its authenticity.
While Shaker Aamer’s release signalled the end of British detainees Guantanamo ordeal, for 103 individuals it continues. Despite repeated promises to close the camp, President Obama has consistently refused to do so. As he draws to the end of his window of opportunity, sign the White House petition to close the camp. The 11th January marked Guantanamo’s 14th birthday. Make sure it doesn’t enjoy a 15th.
