26 Feb 2007

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) today dismissed an appeal by Abu Qatada against the Government’s bid to deport him to Jordan. The Government is relying upon the diplomatic assurance agreed with Jordan as a safeguard against Mr Qatada suffering any torture or ill treatment on his return. The diplomatic assurance, which carries no sanction, does not contain any direct reference to torture.
 

Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty, said today: 
 
"Dodgy little "assurances" from regimes that practice torture convince few outside Government. We know how easily our Government is convinced by creative approaches to international law, but it will take more than wishful thinking and paper promises to wash our hands of torture."  
 
Liberty has always maintained that those suspected of terror crimes should be tried in front of a court of law and imprisoned if found guilty.  
 
Contact: the press office on 0207 378 3677 or 0797 3 831 128  
 
NOTES TO EDITORS

Under international conventions the UK Government cannot send people back to a country where they face a real risk of torture, mistreatment or the death penalty. The Government has sought to reach diplomatic assurances with countries that torture in an attempt to get around this prohibition.  
 
Torture is prohibited absolutely under article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), incorporated into U.K. law by the Human Rights Act 1998. The ban includes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. There are no exceptions allowed, even during times of war or public emergency.
 
The torture ban incorporates a prohibition on the transfer of individuals to countries where they face a substantial risk of torture and other ill-treatment. It is this prohibition which prevents the contracting out of torture and practices like extraordinary rendition.  
 
The U.S. State Department has acknowledged persistent allegations of torture in Jordan. The latest country report on human rights practices, included reported methods such as “beating, sleep deprivation, extended solitary confinement, and physical suspension.”  
 
Liberty has long standing concerns about the use and effectiveness of diplomatic assurances against torture to deport terrorism suspects to their home countries or to third countries where they would be at risk of torture and other ill-treatment. Our main concern is that they would not provide effective protection against torture.  
 
Diplomatic assurances are subject to the limits of diplomacy. They entail trusting a state where torture and ill-treatment are serious human rights problems to honour unenforceable promises regarding a particular individual.

Diplomatic assurances have been breached in the past, as in the case of Maher Arar, the dual Canadian-Syrian national who was deported by the U.S. to Syria via Jordan in September 2002, following diplomatic assurances on torture from Syria. He was severely tortured throughout his detention in Syria, he was repeatedly beaten by Jordanian authorities before being transferred to his final destination, and was recently awarded over £4 million pounds in compensation by the Canadian Government who declared his complete innocence.

Research by international bodies, and detailed assessments of the United States Department of State, all demonstrate the very real risks of sending persons labeled as terrorism suspects back to the following countries;  
 
- Egypt - torture in Egypt is systematic; a fact acknowledged by the FCO in its 2004 annual human rights report.
 
- In Algeria, Morocco, Jordan, and Tunisia, persons suspected of terrorist activity or labeled as such are specifically targeted for abusive treatment, including torture.