In 1997, in the case of Chahal v UK, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that it would be unlawful to deport an individual to a country where they would face a real risk of torture.
 
The UK Government accepted the ruling, which is why it detained suspected terrorists in Belmarsh for more than 3 years. When the House of Lords declared internment to be unlawful, they devised the control order regime, which allows conditions including house arrest to be imposed on suspects.
 
But in the last year, the Government has attempted to undermine the protection provided by the Chahal ruling. It has suggested ‘amending’ the Human Rights Act and has obtained diplomatic assurances (‘Memoranda of Understanding’) from states known to use torture with the intention of sending people to those states.
 
Now the Government is intervening in another ECHR case, Ramzy v the Netherlands. It concerns the proposed return of Mr Ramzy to Algeria by the Dutch authorities. Mr Ramzy claims he will be tortured if sent to Algeria. The UK Government will argue that the rule which prohibits deporting people to face torture ought to be revisited. Along with other human rights organisations we will also be intervening in the case, arguing against the Government and in defence of protections from torture.
 
We believe that the Government’s proposals are unlawful. The ban on torture is absolute - security concerns cannot be used to override it.