Lawyers and
human rights groups say 400 settlements show 'systemic' abuse
The Guardian, Ian Cobain, Thursday 20 December 2012
The Ministry of Defence has paid out £14m in compensation and costs to hundreds of Iraqis who complained that they were illegally detained and tortured by British forces during the five-year occupation of the south-east of the country.
The Ministry of Defence has paid out £14m in compensation and costs to hundreds of Iraqis who complained that they were illegally detained and tortured by British forces during the five-year occupation of the south-east of the country.
Hundreds
more claims are in the pipeline as Iraqis become aware that they are able to
bring proceedings against the UK authorities in the London courts.
The MoD
says it is investigating every allegation of abuse that has been made, adding that
the majority of British servicemen and women deployed to Iraq conducted
themselves "with the highest standards of integrity".
However,
human rights groups and lawyers representing former prisoners say that the
abuse was systemic, with military interrogators and guards responsible for the
mistreatment acting in accordance with both their training in the UK and orders
issued in Iraq.
The
campaigners are calling for a public inquiry into the UK's detention and
interrogation practices following the 2003 invasion. An inquiry would be a
development the MoD would be eager to avoid.
Payments
totalling £8.3m have been made to 162 Iraqis this year. There were payments to
17 individuals last year and 26 in the three years before that.
The average
payment to the 205 people who have made successful claims has been almost
£70,000, including costs. The MoD says it is negotiating payments concerning a
further 196 individuals.
Lawyers
representing former prisoners of the British military say that more than 700
further individuals are likely to make claims next year.
Most of
those compensated were male civilians who said they had been beaten, deprived
of sleep and threatened before being interrogated by British servicemen and
women who had detained them on suspicion of involvement in the violent
insurgency against the occupation. Others said that they suffered sexual
humiliation and were forced into stress positions for prolonged periods.
Many of the
complaints arise out of the actions of a shadowy military intelligence unit
called the Joint Forward Interrogation Team (Jfit) which operated an
interrogation centre throughout the five-year occupation. Officials of the
International Committee of the Red Cross complained about the mistreatment of
detainees at Jfit not long after it was first established.
Despite
this, the interrogators shot hundreds of video films in which they captured
themselves threatening and abusing men who can be seen to be bruised,
disoriented, complaining of starvation and sleep deprivation and, in some
cases, too exhausted to stand unaided.
A former
soldier who served as a guard at Jfit told the Guardian that he and others were
ordered to take hold of blindfolded prisoners by their thumbs in between
interrogation sessions then drag them around assault courses where they could
not be filmed.
He also
confirmed that the prisoners were often beaten during these runs, and that they
would then be returned for interrogation in front of a video camera.
The
interrogators were drawn from all three branches of the forces and included a
large number of reservists.
During
proceedings brought before the high court in London, lawyers representing the
former Jfit prisoners suggested the interrogation centre could be regarded as
"Britain's Abu Ghraib".
Questioned
about the compensation payments, an MoD spokesperson said: "Over 120,000
British troops have served in Iraq and the vast majority have conducted
themselves with the highest standards of integrity and professionalism. All
allegations of abuse will always be investigated thoroughly. We will compensate
victims of abuse where it is right to do so and seek to ensure that those
responsible are brought to justice."
Lutz Oette,
legal counsel at Redress, a London-based NGO which helps torture survivors get
justice, said: "The payments provide a long overdue measure of redress.
However, for the victims compensation without truth and accountability is a
heavy price to pay. For justice to be done there is a need for a full
independent inquiry to establish what happened and who is responsible.
"Looking
at the number of claimants and scale of payments, there clearly seems to be a
systemic problem. It is high time for this to be fully accounted for, first and
foremost for the victims but also the British public, which has an obvious
interest to know the truth behind the figures."
Next month
the high court will hear a judicial review of the MoD's refusal to hold a
public inquiry into the abuses. Human rights groups and lawyers for the former
prisoners say the UK government is obliged to hold an inquiry to meet its
obligations under the European convention on human rights – and particularly
under article three of the convention, which protects individuals from torture.
After a
hearing the high court highlighted matters supporting the allegations of
systemic abuse. These included:
• The same
techniques being used at the same places for the same purpose: to assist
interrogation.
• The
facilities being under the command of an officer.
• Military
doctors examining each prisoner at various stages in their detention.
•
Investigations by the Royal Military police that were concluded without anyone
being held to account.
If the
court does order a public inquiry, responsibility for any systemic abuse is
likely to be traced up the military chain of command and beyond.
The MoD
claims no public inquiry is necessary as it has instituted an investigation
body, the Iraq Historical Allegations Team (Ihat), which is examining the abuse
allegations as well as a number of prisoner deaths in British military custody.
After Ihat
investigators examined the videos shot at Jfit, three interrogators were
referred to the Service Prosecuting Authority with a recommendation that war
crimes charges be considered.
Prosecutors
eventually decided that the matters were insufficiently serious for war crimes
charges, and that disciplinary charges were unlikely to lead to convictions.
They concluded that one soldier had committed offences, but that this was
"in accordance with the training that they had been given"; it would
be inappropriate to charge him.
Other
inquiries have led Ihat to recommend that the MoD makes compensation payments
to former prisoners.
But lawyers
for the former prisoners believe Ihat is insufficiently independent as it
answers to MoD officials. One investigator quit Ihat alleging that the
organisation's inquiry is not genuine, but more a face-saving exercise.
Related Articles:
CIA 'tortured and sodomised' terror suspect, European court rules
Guantanamo inmate Shaker Aamer to sue UK for defamation
Have America's generals lost their way?
CIA 'tortured and sodomised' terror suspect, European court rules
Guantanamo inmate Shaker Aamer to sue UK for defamation
Have America's generals lost their way?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.