On 21 February 2008, the Foreign Secretary David Miliband admitted in the House of Commons that two “rendition” flights carrying detainees to Guantánamo Bay had stopped off to refuel at the American military base on the British-administered island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Foreign Secretary further stated that each plane carried a single detainee who did not leave the plane, and that the US had assured the UK that no
On 21 February 2008, the Foreign Secretary David Miliband admitted in the House of Commons that two “rendition” flights carrying detainees to Guantánamo Bay had stopped off to refuel at the American military base on the British-administered island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Foreign Secretary further stated that each plane carried a single detainee who did not leave the plane, and that the US had assured the UK that no
other rendition flights had passed through Diego Garcia, any other UK overseas territories, or the UK mainland since then[1].
This admission was made after several years of assurances by former Foreign Secretaries that no such flights had taken place and that the Foreign Office had been firmly assured by the US that it would not render prisoners through its territory without advance permission. The Government had previously refused to investigate allegations put to it by the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) and the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition, claiming that the American assurances were sufficient.
The Foreign Secretary’s admission was welcome. However, it has raised many other questions which, one year later, remain unanswered. Nonetheless, in the past year, much more evidence and many allegations of British involvement in extraordinary rendition have emerged and come to light.
Following this admission, the Foreign Secretary sent a list to the US, of nearly 400 flights about which MPs, campaign groups and others had raised concerns, seeking specific assurances that they had not been involved in renditions. He received new assurances, but these specifically excluded rendition flights through UK airspace with a detainee onboard that did not land at a UK airport. The Foreign Secretary refused to ask the US about flights travelling to or from a rendition and, despite repeated requests, the Foreign Office has not investigated further[2].
In early 2009, it was revealed that one of the two detainees had been released from Guantánamo Bay. The other had allegedly been released prior to this admission, yet the Foreign Office has not confirmed the identity of either detainee or the conditions of their detention. Little further investigation has taken place into other rendition flights. The All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition is investigating whether these rendition flights constitute a breach of the lease agreement between the US and UK, and whether criminal charges can be brought in relation to the flights.
Credible information about the probability of other flights has emerged through reports by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as Reprieve and Amnesty International. A 2006 Amnesty International report alleges that as many as 39 rendition flights may have landed or taken off from Prestwick Airport in Glasgow and 13 from Luton Airport between 2002 and 2005[3]. A report by Reprieve following the Scottish Parliament’s decision to investigate Scottish involvement in extraordinary rendition alleges that over one hundred rendition flights may have stopped on Scottish soil[4].
British involvement in extraordinary rendition is not limited to the passage of rendition flights carrying detainees through and/or landing on UK territories, but extends further to the complicity of the UK Intelligence Services (MI5 and MI6) in the process. Nearly all of the former British nationals and residents detained at Guantánamo Bay have spoken of having been visited by British security agents whilst held at Guantánamo Bay and, in many cases, in Afghanistan (mainly at Bagram). The government states that, if they were visited, agents did not know about their treatment or conditions of detention.
Furthermore, since Mr. Miliband’s admission of the use of Diego Garcia for rendition flights, further evidence has emerged of British involvement in torture and rendition in other parts of the world.
Binyam Mohamed, who returned to the UK in February 2009, claims that he was rendered from Pakistan to Morocco, then to Afghanistan, before being rendered to Guantánamo Bay. Mr. Mohamed claims that while in detention, he was beaten, threatened with rape, had his genitals repeatedly slashed with a razor blade, was subjected to a mock execution, and to sensory and sleep deprivation, and suffered many other forms of cruelty and brutality. Military and civilian lawyers for Mr. Mohamed have found his story to be consistent.
A case was brought by British lawyers acting on behalf of Mr. Mohamed, which sought to force the British government to disclose documents in its possession which provide evidence that British and American authorities were fully aware of his torture.
The British government refused to disclose the information and turned the case over to the Attorney General for investigation, for possible criminal prosecutions of agents involved. Following recent revelations about what the British government actually knew, the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) is reopening its investigation into UK involvement in Mr. Mohamed’s torture and rendition.
Beyond Guantánamo Bay, MI5 involvement in the torture of British citizens in Pakistan came to light in 2008. Intelligence agents provided questions to be asked of men detained by the Pakistani Intelligence Services (ISI). The men, who were subjected to beatings and electric shocks among other forms of torture, were also visited by MI5 agents. The Home Secretary and the Foreign Secretary both refused to appear before a JCHR panel to consider issues relating to the UK outsourcing the torture of its citizens.
In February 2009, the Defence Minister John Hutton admitted that in 2004, two Pakistani men allegedly involved in terrorism were detained by British troops while Basra was under British administration, and were handed over to the US military which rendered them to Afghanistan. Claims of Iraqis detained by British troops being handed over to the US military to be rendered elsewhere were first made by former SAS soldier Ben Griffin in 2008; he has since been gagged by the Ministry of Defence and is unable to comment further. Mr. Hutton revealed that the British government was aware of this episode, but did not comment as to whether other detainees were rendered in a similar manner. He conceded that Parliament had previously been misled about renditions through Iraq and the extra judicial handover of detainees to the Americans by the British Army.
As recently stated by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Dr. Manfred Nowak, collusion in torture and unlawful detention, as practiced under the term “extraordinary rendition”, are breaches of Britain’s obligations under international law. The Foreign Office has repeatedly stated that it does not condone or practice the use of torture, yet through its insistence on accepting American assurances that later prove to be unreliable, and its failure to disclose evidence that would prove otherwise, the Foreign Office’s credibility on this issue is undermined and largely discredited.
2. Diego Garcia: A Year On
The admission that the island had been used for rendition has resulted in the surfacing of many other facets of British involvement in extraordinary rendition, but little official substantiation of the facts. The first anniversary of this admission was an opportune time for parliamentarians and members of civil society to come together to discuss what progress has subsequently been made, and what further steps should now be taken; to persuade the British government to disclose the full extent of its involvement in the US extraordinary rendition programme, and its collusion with foreign governments in the torture and unlawful detention of British and foreign nationals abroad.
The meeting was attended by around 30 people, including representatives of several NGOs, and MPs Sarah Teather and Edward Davey, both of whom are members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Guantánamo Bay, and who represent two survivors of Guantánamo Bay and the extraordinary rendition programme. These two men, along with another former detainee, attended the meeting and spoke of some of their experiences.
3. The View From Westminster
i) Sarah Teather MP (Lib Dem: Brent East), chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Guantánamo Bay, spoke first about the recent release of Binyam Mohamed. She welcomed his return but regretted that it had only occurred on the back of horrific revelations. Ms. Teather called for the Foreign Secretary to be held to account over Mr. Mohamed’s treatment. The Foreign Office and the American administration have adopted a circular approach to the evidence to cover up their involvement in his ordeal as neither party wants this information in the public domain. Ms. Teather stated that, “the return of British residents from Guantánamo Bay is not the end of the story, as we need to understand what went wrong in our system, both in the UK and the US, for us to end up in a procedure whereby the British government was involved in torture. The fact that the US has a new president is no assurance that this will not happen again. We need to trace what has happened in order to prevent it happening again. The government must carry out a full inquiry into what has happened in Diego Garcia and the Turks and Caicos Islands. Reprieve has carried out research into this. These are serious allegations that the Government has to answer. Both parliament and concerned individuals must hold the government to account. We are still a long way from closing Guantánamo Bay. European countries must take back their own residents or Guantánamo detainees who have no safe country to return to. We need to understand our role and why our Government has remained silent over this issue”. She urged the public to write to their MPs and make the following demands:
· call for a full inquiry into the US use of British territories for extraordinary rendition · call for a full, open inquiry into extraordinary rendition generally, starting with the case of Binyam Mohamed · ask the British government to explain why the US will not release Shaker Aamer
Ms. Teather added that whilst it has become a little easier to obtain information from the FCO following President Obama’s decision to close down Guantánamo Bay, there is still a collaboration of silence. It has been suggested that the fact that they will not release the information implies that there is a huge amount being concealed. There is some impetus coming from Europe. Admissions have recently been made by the Spanish and the Portuguese regarding rendition flights passing through their airspace. Both countries have said that they will investigate.
ii) Edward Davey MP (Lib Dem: Kingston and Surbiton) stated that the debate with the UK government had reached the stage where it was being urged to come clean on whether it has a policy on torture. The UK is cooperating with countries that torture to obtain intelligence, and there is a history of this: the former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, was smeared by the FCO when he tried to reveal evidence of what the UK knew of the practice of torture in that country. This has been further corroborated by the recent case of Binyam Mohamed.
Whether written down or not, the decision was taken that the UK would cooperate with other countries that use torture. This policy has been reinforced in the post 9/11 climate and the UK has shown that it is willing to cooperate with such states. Concerning the involvement of British agents in Binyam Mohamed’s rendition and torture, Mr. Davey queried what kinds of questions British agents who questioned Mr. Mohamed after he had been tortured were required to ask, whether it was necessary for them to query his treatment and conditions of detention, or whether they avoided such issues and how information was shared with the countries involved. This information must be gathered and linked to the UK’s policy on torture.
Mr. Davey also called for the government to be called to account. He asserted that there is enough evidence of wrongdoing. However, it is important that the investigation does not result in a total whitewash or the identification of particular rogue agents who serve as adequate scapegoats for the wrongdoing of others, as this case is likely to go through all the way to a senior level. MPs, the media and victims need to get the answers to these questions. Unless the government provides evidence, it is difficult to substantiate these allegations, although there is enough evidence already to warrant a full investigation. Criminal proceedings against those involved should be brought, either through the Attorney General’s investigation, the Director of Public Prosecutions (to whom the Attorney General has referred evidence for review), the police, or otherwise Binyam Mohamed. Or someone else should. As well as considering the case of British nationals and residents, and prisons in British-administered territories, consideration must also be given to other prisons and other individuals facing a similar situation.
4. The Survivor’s Perspective:
One of the most important aspects of this meeting was to give survivors of torture and rendition an opportunity in Parliament to express what they have experienced and what they want to see happen.
i) Bisher Al-Rawi: Just a few years ago I was in Guantánamo Bay in an orange jumpsuit with Jamil El-Banna looking out through the steel bars, so to be here is like a dream. The information about extraordinary rendition is coming through from amateur plane spotters and people like that rather than officials. We have now gone way beyond the stage at which the government relies on plane spotters’ notebooks and it must move beyond to consider the issue seriously in order to start ending the process. Whenever cases are brought to court, they are stopped early on grounds of national security; even in trying to find out what happened to me, a well publicised story, I came up against a wall of secrecy. Using national security as a cover is wrong.
I came to the UK in 1984 and never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined that this would happen. The men I met who are held in Guantánamo Bay hold the UK in the highest regard for its standards of fairness and justice. The Government has admitted to the wrong it has done: when the Diego Garcia revelations were made one year ago, we thought this was the end, that everything would be known and that this admission would close this chapter.
But over the last year, very little news has come out about extraordinary rendition. If you consider the case of the Canadian, Maher Arar, into whose case the Canadian government held an inquiry and made an apology, we need to follow a similar route. The quicker we close this chapter, the quicker we can heal: both those of us who are directly affected as well others who are hurt by this process.
I’m not looking for heads to roll but I want the truth to come out. For example, there was an MI5 agent who I knew in the UK, I met him in Guantánamo Bay and he said to me, “I didn’t think things would get to where they are now” but I couldn’t use that statement to help me get released because the Americans wouldn’t let me use it. We have to admit that a mistake has been made and leave things in the past. We hope that Guantánamo will close but they’ve been saying that since it opened. There is no point waiting for the US to act, in spite of Obama’s promises. The UK must take the initiative. The only way to move forward is for the Government to come forward and for the people responsible to take responsibility for their actions.
ii) Omar Deghayes: the information the Americans had about allegations that I was fighting in Chechnya, where I’ve never been, came to them through MI5. They thought it was something they could use to make me speak. It was the British who provided this information, for these baseless allegations that I was a Chechen fighter; they had a picture which they said was of me fighting in Chechnya and said that it would be better if I just admitted that it was me before the files come through, but my lawyer Clive Stafford-Smith had the photograph analysed and it was shown that that the man in the picture was someone called Abu Walid who was already dead. I don’t need anyone to prove to me that the British were involved. I spent six years in Guantánamo Bay mainly due to British involvement. The British involvement is clear and all the ex-detainees know that. All the information that the Americans had came from the British. We know that the British intelligence services were among the first to get access to Guantánamo; they went to see the Tipton Three there and they were surprised to see them. They were shocked that they were so young.
There hasn’t actually been any change at Guantánamo Bay under Obama. There were over 800 people held at Guantánamo and by releasing over 600 of them, the Bush administration has admitted that it was wrong about them. That’s proof that the Guantánamo system has nothing to do with terrorism or intelligence gathering. The interrogators there, who are among some of the most skilled people in America, would say to us that we were held there for retribution: we believe that you’re terrorists and we will only release you as wretches, when you are physically and psychologically broken and your mothers and sisters have to do everything for you.
Most detainees have developed serious illnesses; even the young ones, they’re suffering from things that young people don’t suffer from or have unusual illnesses. At Guantánamo there were lots of beatings, often for the silliest things, and the guards would always focus on 9/11 when beating us and telling us it was because of that. None of the rendition victims were in the US, so how could they be related to 9/11? You’d have to speak to the victims to know how horrific and barbaric the regime is at a prison like Guantánamo.
There are really bad prisons in places like Egypt, but at least there you would have the same guards for six years who will torture you for the first year. Then they would get tired and leave you for the rest of the time, but at Guantánamo Bay, they would bring in new guards every six months, once the brainwashing had worn off on the new recruits. It was very barbaric, but in a sophisticated way.
iii) Jamil El-Banna: the British intelligence services were directly involved in what happened to Bisher and me. The Americans had absolutely no idea of who I was and didn’t know anything about me or Bisher until Britain gave them full information. They told me “we knew nothing about you until the British sold you to us”. When British intelligence came I said this to them and they said that it was nothing to do with them. The information was all in the telegrams provided[5]. The Americans acted on the information provided by the UK but Britain has denied any involvement. I’m shocked by Britain’s involvement. It still disturbs me as they encouraged us to go to Gambia because they knew what would happen we got when there.
5. The Role Of The Media:
During the meeting, there was discussion about the role of the media. Much criticism was levelled at the media over its poor coverage of what has been happening at Guantánamo Bay over the past seven years, and its coverage of extraordinary rendition. When detainees return, they are often welcomed with baseless, malicious commentary and stories in the newspapers. In particular, the media often portray a xenophobic bias, focusing on the economic burden that the individual might place on British society. Furthermore, their supporters, including politicians, are often maligned for defending their human rights. The media has an important role to play in bringing out the stories of victims and making the public aware of what is happening.
The media must make sure it is dealing with the facts and not just look for a smoking gun. Jackie Chase from Brighton Against Guantánamo stated that the detainees are subject to trial by media upon their return, even though there is no evidence whatsoever of their involvement in any illegal activity and they have never been before a credible court or had a trial or conviction of any kind. Poor investigative skills and media sensationalism only detract further from the severity of the issue.
The media has a further role to play in calling for information about extraordinary rendition to be made public and must add its voice to calls for a public inquiry.
6. The View Of The London Guantánamo Campaign:
Britain’s role and collusion in the American extraordinary rendition programme is indisputable. It is in the public interest and in the interest of national security that the British Government makes public the full extent of the involvement of government agencies in the UK and abroad, of how much it is aware, and since when. Otherwise it cannot be taken for granted that these activities are not currently occurring, or will not occur again in the future. Secrecy is an excuse and not a justification; the public has the right to know the extent of the wrongdoing and illegality public servants have been involved in.
Extraordinary rendition undermines the very values that the UK Government claims to stand for. By creating a black hole where the law is circumvented, the value and indispensability of the rule of law is undermined; the law seeks to protect allpeople, whereas extraordinary rendition serves to destroy them “physically and psychologically”.
Recently, Mr. Miliband called on Britain to champion the rule of law, “for it is the cornerstone of the democratic society. We must uphold our commitments to human rights and civil liberties at home and abroad”[6]. A full independent public investigation into the United Kingdom’s role in extraordinary rendition would confirm such a noble assertion.
While Mr. Miliband has also asserted many times recently in Parliament that the UK does not condone or practice torture, recent British history and practice in Northern Ireland have shown that this has not always been the case. Many of the torture techniques used today by the US in Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere were used not so long ago in Northern Ireland. As recently as 18 February 2009, the House of Lords decided that it was safe to return individuals to countries where they were likely to face torture[7], based on the same “firm assurances” given by foreign governments, such as those provided by the US in relation to Diego Garcia.
7. Notes:
Extraordinary rendition:
Extraordinary rendition is a CIA programme that started under the Clinton administration in 1995, authorising the extrajudicial detention and transfer of non-American suspects for interrogation to countries where torture is practiced openly. The CIA claims that it is an intelligence-gathering programme. Since 9/11, the use of this practice has increased under the “war on terror”, with men, women and children “disappearing” into “black sites”. Many countries all over the world have been involved in either holding detainees or facilitating their unlawful detention and torture, making them complicit in this programme. The CIA has admitted to over 30,000 individuals having been rendered; the actual number may be up to five times higher.
Diego Garcia:
Diego Garcia, part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, is the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago. In 1971, Britain entered an agreement with the US, under which the latter would set up a military base. The island remains subject to British law. Reprieve has alleged that as well as hosting rendition flights, it is home to a prison ship moored off the coast.
The London Guantánamo Campaign, part of the National Guantánamo Coalition, campaigns for justice for all prisoners at Guantánamo bay, for the closure of this and all CIA secret prisons, and for an end to the practice of extraordinary rendition.
[5] These telegrams were sent by British intelligence to the CIA in November 2002, shortly before Bisher Al-Rawi and Jamil El-Banna travelled to Gambia for a business trip. The telegrams, made public in 2006, stated that they were terrorists and were carrying a dangerous device: a battery charger from an Argos shop. This was part of the “evidence” upon which their rendition from Gambia to Afghanistan and to Guantánamo Bay was based.
[7] In the cases of RB(Algeria) (FC) and another v SSHD [2009 UKHL 10] and OO v SSHD [2009]
Diego Garcia, part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, is the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago. In 1971, Britain entered an agreement with the US, under which the latter would set up a military base. The island remains subject to British law. Reprieve has alleged that as well as hosting rendition flights, it is home to a prison ship moored off the coast.
Extraordinary rendition is a CIA programme that started under the Clinton administration in 1995, authorising the extrajudicial detention and transfer of non-American suspects for interrogation to countries where torture is practiced openly. The CIA claims that it is an intelligence-gathering programme. Since 9/11, the use of this practice has increased under the “war on terror”, with men, women and children “disappearing” into “black sites”. Many countries all over the world have been involved in either holding detainees or facilitating their unlawful detention and torture, making them complicit in this programme. The CIA has admitted to over 30,000 individuals having been rendered; the actual number may be up to five times higher.
Britain’s role and collusion in the American extraordinary rendition programme is indisputable. It is in the public interest and in the interest of national security that the British Government makes public the full extent of the involvement of government agencies in the UK and abroad, of how much it is aware, and since when. Otherwise it cannot be taken for granted that these activities are not currently occurring, or will not occur again in the future. Secrecy is an excuse and not a justification; the public has the right to know the extent of the wrongdoing and illegality public servants have been involved in.
During the meeting, there was discussion about the role of the media. Much criticism was levelled at the media over its poor coverage of what has been happening at Guantánamo Bay over the past seven years, and its coverage of extraordinary rendition. When detainees return, they are often welcomed with baseless, malicious commentary and stories in the newspapers. In particular, the media often portray a xenophobic bias, focusing on the economic burden that the individual might place on British society. Furthermore, their supporters, including politicians, are often maligned for defending their human rights. The media has an important role to play in bringing out the stories of victims and making the public aware of what is happening.
the information the Americans had about allegations that I was fighting in Chechnya, where I’ve never been, came to them through MI5. They thought it was something they could use to make me speak. It was the British who provided this information, for these baseless allegations that I was a Chechen fighter; they had a picture which they said was of me fighting in Chechnya and said that it would be better if I just admitted that it was me before the files come through, but my lawyer Clive Stafford-Smith had the photograph analysed and it was shown that that the man in the picture was someone called Abu Walid who was already dead. I don’t need anyone to prove to me that the British were involved. I spent six years in Guantánamo Bay mainly due to British involvement. The British involvement is clear and all the ex-detainees know that. All the information that the Americans had came from the British. We know that the British intelligence services were among the first to get access to Guantánamo; they went to see the Tipton Three there and they were surprised to see them. They were shocked that they were so young.
Just a few years ago I was in Guantánamo Bay in an orange jumpsuit with Jamil El-Banna looking out through the steel bars, so to be here is like a dream. The information about extraordinary rendition is coming through from amateur plane spotters and people like that rather than officials. We have now gone way beyond the stage at which the government relies on plane spotters’ notebooks and it must move beyond to consider the issue seriously in order to start ending the process. Whenever cases are brought to court, they are stopped early on grounds of national security; even in trying to find out what happened to me, a well publicised story, I came up against a wall of secrecy. Using national security as a cover is wrong.
Just a few years ago I was in Guantánamo Bay in an orange jumpsuit with Jamil El-Banna looking out through the steel bars, so to be here is like a dream. The information about extraordinary rendition is coming through from amateur plane spotters and people like that rather than officials. We have now gone way beyond the stage at which the government relies on plane spotters’ notebooks and it must move beyond to consider the issue seriously in order to start ending the process. Whenever cases are brought to court, they are stopped early on grounds of national security; even in trying to find out what happened to me, a well publicised story, I came up against a wall of secrecy. Using national security as a cover is wrong.
Just a few years ago I was in Guantánamo Bay in an orange jumpsuit with Jamil El-Banna looking out through the steel bars, so to be here is like a dream. The information about extraordinary rendition is coming through from amateur plane spotters and people like that rather than officials. We have now gone way beyond the stage at which the government relies on plane spotters’ notebooks and it must move beyond to consider the issue seriously in order to start ending the process. Whenever cases are brought to court, they are stopped early on grounds of national security; even in trying to find out what happened to me, a well publicised story, I came up against a wall of secrecy. Using national security as a cover is wrong.
Just a few years ago I was in Guantánamo Bay in an orange jumpsuit with Jamil El-Banna looking out through the steel bars, so to be here is like a dream. The information about extraordinary rendition is coming through from amateur plane spotters and people like that rather than officials. We have now gone way beyond the stage at which the government relies on plane spotters’ notebooks and it must move beyond to consider the issue seriously in order to start ending the process. Whenever cases are brought to court, they are stopped early on grounds of national security; even in trying to find out what happened to me, a well publicised story, I came up against a wall of secrecy. Using national security as a cover is wrong.
London Campaign 
and MPs Sarah Teather and Edward Davey, both of whom are members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Guantánamo Bay, and who represent two survivors of Guantánamo Bay and the extraordinary rendition programme. These two men, along with another former detainee, attended the meeting and spoke of some of their experiences.
involvement in his ordeal as neither party wants this information in the public domain. Ms. Teather stated that, “the return of British residents from Guantánamo Bay is not the end of the story, as we need to understand what went wrong in our system, both in the UK and the US, for us to end up in a procedure whereby the British government was involved in torture. The fact that the US has a new president is no assurance that this will not happen again. We need to trace what has happened in order to prevent it happening again. The government must carry out a full inquiry into what has happened in Diego Garcia and the Turks and Caicos Islands. Reprieve has carried out research into this. These are serious allegations that the Government has to answer. Both parliament and concerned individuals must hold the government to account. We are still a long way from closing Guantánamo Bay. European countries must take back their own residents or Guantánamo detainees who have no safe country to return to. We need to understand our role and why our Government has remained silent over this issue”. She urged the public to write to their MPs and make the following demands:
the stage where it was being urged to come clean on whether it has a policy on torture. The UK is cooperating with countries that torture to obtain intelligence, and there is a history of this: the former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, was smeared by the FCO when he tried to reveal evidence of what the UK knew of the practice of torture in that country. This has been further corroborated by the recent case of Binyam Mohamed.