As David Cameron announced the details of an inquiry into the UK's role in rendition and torture, more than 100 Iraqi civilians who were detained and allegedly tortured by British troops embarked upon the first round of their campaign to secure a public inquiry into the orders and policies that governed their treatment.
Lawyers representing the former detainees asked the high court for permission to seek a judicial review of the refusal by Liam Fox, the defence secretary, to establish an inquiry into the British army's use of torture after the invasion of Iraq. The court reserved its judgment.
The Iraqis say that they were tortured before or during interrogation at one or more of 14 separate British military detention centres in south-east Iraq. The allegations span a period of more than five years, from immediately after the March 2003 invasion until December 2008.
Their lawyers say they have documented evidence of systemic abuse, including 59 allegations of detainees being hooded, 11 cases of electric shocks, 122 separate allegations of individuals being subjected to sound deprivation through the use of ear muffs, 52 cases of sleep deprivation, 131 separate complaints of sight deprivation using blackened goggles, 39 complaints of enforced nakedness and 18 allegations from detainees that they were kept awake though the use of pornographic DVDs played on laptop computers.
They argue that the government has an obligation to investigate this mistreatment because it breaches the detainees' rights under article 3 of the European convention on human rights (ECHR), which prohibits torture and inhumane treatment, and that a public inquiry is the only appropriate way to meet that obligation.
Michael Fordham QC, for the detainees, told the court that "the state is implicated, actively or passively" in the mistreatment, and that there was ample evidence that the detainees were not the victims of "rogue soldiers" but had been subjected to "abuse that has some underlying cause which requires investigation".
Solicitors who have examined the former detainees' allegations of widespread abuse in UK military custody believe that only an inquiry can establish at which point along the military or political chain of command a decision was taken to authorise abusive interrogation techniques.
The Ministry of Defence accepts that it is obliged, under the terms of the ECHR, to investigate the allegations, but argues that an inquiry is unnecessary. The court heard that the MoD has set up a team of military police, headed by a civilian, which could spend two years investigating the allegations. After that an inquiry could be considered.
Lawyers for the former detainees questioned the ability of the Royal Military police to conduct an effective and impartial investigation. Fordham added that a criminal investigation might establish what happened to the Iraqis, but would not uncover why it happened. "There is a crying and obvious need to complete the picture," he said.
If the former detainees win their court battles, they will have secured the third inquiry into the abuse of Iraqis by British troops. One is already under way into the torture of a group of detainees in September 2003. One of those men, Baha Mousa, died after suffering 93 separate injuries. A second inquiry is to examine allegations that 20 Iraqis were murdered and others tortured at a British army base north of Basra in May 2004. The MoD says all 20 men died on the battlefield.
Source
