THE UK Government could face a legal challenge after it ruled out a new judge-led inquiry into allegations that UK agencies were complicit in the so-called “extraordinary rendition” of terror suspects after the 9/11 attacks.
David Lidington, the Cabinet Office Minister, told MPs in a statement there was neither a policy reason nor a legal obligation for a further inquiry to be held.
The de facto Deputy Prime Minister also said he did not believe such an inquiry would deliver closure to the families involved given the secrecy required for the relevant material.
But Labour said the decision was a "fundamental error of judgement" by Theresa May while the SNP also regretted it, insisting a judge-led inquiry would not need to start from scratch but could pick up on the reports from the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee[ISC].
Last year, it found the UK tolerated "inexcusable" treatment of detainees by the US during the war on terror following the 9/11 attacks in 2001.
Earlier this month, a report from The Rendition Project of academics and writers about the CIA’s network of so-called “black sites,” claimed Glasgow Airport was used in the rendition of a man who was allegedly tortured in Egypt, which led to false information that helped build the case for the Iraq War.
Other airports, including Prestwick, Inverness and Aberdeen, have also been said to have involved rendition, dubbed “torture flights”.
In response to the Government’s decision, Reprieve, the human rights charity, said it was now considering a legal challenge.
"Today, the Government has not only broken its promises to Parliament and the public but also to survivors of war-on-terror era torture,” declared Dan Dolan, its Deputy Director.
"By refusing to deliver on its commitment to hold a fully independent inquiry, the Government has failed to fulfil its legal responsibility to independently investigate allegations of torture and hold those responsible to account. Reprieve is exploring legal action to challenge this decision," he added.
Mr Lidington explained the rendition claims had been subject to a number of police investigations over the years, none of which had resulted in further action being taken although some inquiries were continuing.
However, Labour’s Emily Thornberry claimed the Prime Minister was wrong to decide not to make good on the commitment of her predecessor not to honour the promises of Ken Clarke, the former Justice Secretary, and not to listen to the recommendations of the ISC.
"They were all absolutely clear that the only way to get to the truth on these issues and to learn lessons for the future was for the Government to commission an independent and judge-led inquiry with a power and authority to examine all the evidence and question every potential witness, and come up with conclusions with which the Government would be bound."
Joanna Cherry for the SNP told MPs there was “unfinished business here” and argued the only way to take forward the ISC probe was to hold an independent judge-led inquiry.
“Such an inquiry wouldn’t require to start from scratch, it could take the ISC findings as a base and they could provide a clear roadmap for a future investigation.
“A judge-led inquiry could focus on answering the unanswered questions, reviewing the unexplored cases and examining the evidence the ISC was not able to see,” she added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel