|
The London Blasts: Media
Review
ONE MONTH ON
DAY
36: Friday 12 August 2005
Contents:
Deportation Arrests
What Has Changed
Bullying The Judges
A Lengthy Process?
Worthless Promises
Jordan And Algeria
Protest
DEPORTATION ARRESTS
'The
first 10 foreign nationals to face deportation on the grounds
of national security under the government's new anti-terrorism
stance were yesterday rounded up in raids across Britain.
Nine, nearly all former Belmarsh terror detainees,
face being sent back to Algeria - a country with one of
the poorest human rights records in north Africa.'
'The 10th was the radical preacher
described as al-Qaida's "ambassador in Europe",
Abu Qatada. He faces being deported to his native Jordan,
which this week signed a "no death penalty, no torture"
agreement with the UK.' (Guardian,
page 1)
'Civil rights lawyers Louise Christian
said: "Some of these people
had been held in prison for over three years and the authorities
knew who their representatives are, but didn't inform them."
'
'Solicitors Birnberg, Peirce &
Partners, who represent some of those seized, said the men
were not allowed to instruct counsel.'
'The firm added: "Of those likely
to have been arrested today, five are the subject of serious
psychiatric concern as a result of the damage each was caused
by his previous indefinite detention." ' (Daily
Mirror)
WHAT HAS CHANGED
'The
abandoned Belmarsh system had been created because there
was "no realistic possibility", under human rights
laws, of deporting suspects to nations which might use the
death penalty or torture, and insufficient evidence to try
them for terrorism targeted against Britain.'
'Jordan has now pledged not to execute
or torture those returned, and the Government is close to
signing similar agreements with up to nine other countries.'
'Yesterday's detentions in London,
Luton, Leicestershire and the West Midlands took place because
the Home Office believes there is a realistic prospect of
deportation which will survive legal challenges. Charles
Clarke, the Home Secretary, said: "The circumstances
of our national security have changed. It is vital that
we act against those who threaten it." ' (Telegraph,
page 1)
In other words, what has changed is
not the probability of mistreatment of the deportees, but
(a) the perceived risk of harm if the detainees remain in
the UK (as perceived by the Government), and (b) the willingness
of judges of judges to place detainees at risk of torture
and/or execution by deportation.
BULLYING THE JUDGES
'The Government is planning legislation
instructing judges how to interpret the Human Rights Act,
it emerged last night. Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor,
said that the new law would oblige judges to give
equal weight to considerations of national security and
to the rights of the individual.
“All law operates on the basis that if the facts change
then the law changes, and the law is going to change,”
he said. “We have got to get the right balance and
ultimately where the balance lies is a matter for Parliament.”
'
It is a matter of argument as to whether
Britain's national security is improved or eroded by action
which discriminates against Muslims, puts Muslims at risk
of torture and death in order to censor their speech, and
curbs criticism of British foreign policy by Muslims. Does
such a package of laws, smashing hard-won freedoms, tend
to reduce the anger
amongst some alienated young Muslims that produces bombs,
or increase it?
A LENGTHY PROCESS?
'Lawyers for the ten men and human
rights groups warned the Government that it faces a
fight that could take up to three years and cost
about £2 million.' (Times,
page 6)
'The government fully expects the deportation
process to take months
and is bracing itself for a second showdown in the Lords
following last December's decision by law lords that detention
of foreign terror suspects without trial was incompatible
with human rights obligations.' (FT,
page 2)
'All the men were taken to top-security
prisons at Full Sutton, near York, and Long Lartin, near
Evesham, as their lawyers immediately began work on their
appeals. They have five working days to lodge their challenge.
Any hearing is unlikely to take place until near the end
of the year.'
WORTHLESS PROMISES
'Without a formal deal with Algeria
that the men will not be tortured, it is inconceivable that
the courts will agree to their deportation. This arrangement
also relies on Whitehall establishing an independent monitoring
commission.'
'Officials said that they were nowhere
near finalising membership of the commission. One said:
“We need a respected body such as the Red Cross to
convince sceptics of its value as an independent organisation.”
'
'The warning that it could take up
to three years before the detainees were flown out was made
by a senior human rights lawyer, who predicted a legal battle
ending with a challenge in the European Court of Human Rights
at Strasbourg. He said:
“The key issue is that the agreements with states
are not binding, and torture and inhumane treatment are
routinely carried out by rogue agents and overzealous security
agents. How can we be sure these agreements will be met?”
' (Times,
page 6)
'Britain also needs to secure specific
guarantees from Jordan in regard to the men it wishes to
send back.'
'The memorandum of understanding between
the two countries, published yesterday, also provides for
an independent body to monitor the agreement. Its members
will be appointed by Amman and London.'
'Under the agreement, Jordan promises
to offer suspects humane treatment, judicial oversight if
detained in Jordan, disclosure of the reasons for detention,
regular visits by the independent monitoring body, unrestricted
access to UK consular facilities, religious freedom, a right
to a fair trial and the ability to prepare a proper defence.'
'Both countries would be able to withdraw
from the agreement, but its provisions would continue to
apply to any deportees expelled under them.'
'Human rights campaigners have said
such assurances are "not worth the paper they are written
on" but legal experts
believe it may be hard to prove a foreign government would
inevitably break its promises.' (FT,
page 2)
Note that this is a reversal of the
burden of proof. Rather than the Government having to prove
that deportees will be safe, it is trying to create a legal
framework where detainees have to prove that they would
be at risk if they were deported.
'There are few precedents for testing
such diplomatic assurances. Liberty,
the human rights organisation, pointed yesterday to the
case of Maher Arar,
a dual Canadian-Syrian national deported by the United States
to Syria via Jordan in September 2002, following assurances
on torture from Damascus.'
'Mr Arar claimed that as well as being
severely tortured throughout
his detention in Syria, he was repeatedly
beaten by the Jordanian authorities.' (Guardian,
page 6)
JORDAN AND ALGERIA
'Last night the 10 were back in the
maximum security prisons Full Sutton, near York, and Long
Lartin, Worcestershire. Their lawyers, Birnberg Peirce,
protested that they were being moved around the country
to prevent them being in contact with their legal representatives.'
'In a statement, the lawyers said:
"Jordan and Algeria are at the top of every list of
countries known to use the most brutal of forbidden measures."
'
'The prospect of sending the men back
to Jordan and Algeria horrified human rights and Muslim
groups in Britain. Amnesty International said the assurances
"of known torturers were not worth the paper they were
written on", while the Muslim Council of Britain warned
against turning a "blind eye to torture".' (Guardian,
page 1)
PROTEST
We can't find any actions/protests
that you can support on this issue on the Liberty, Amnesty
International, Human Rights Watch, Muslim Association of
Britain, or Campaign Against Criminalising Communities websites.
(You may wish to write to these organisations urging them
to take action.)
In the absence of such materials/initiatives,
and in the face of time constraints here at JNV over the
next few days, we can suggest writing
to the newspapers to protest against the deportation
arrests (email addresses of British papers here
- international letter writers always welcomed by editors),
writing to MPs (TheyWorkForYou
is a good online system), and planning
and advertising a local
protest next Saturday, when leaflets and other materials
will be available from/through JNV. (It's quite possible
that there will be a snap London demo also, but even so,
lots of local events that are publicised in local newspapers
and radio will reach more people than a London demo which
attracts little national media attention.)
Points you may wish to make:
1) IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE, TRY THEM,
DON'T DEPORT THEM
The men being detained have not been
convicted or even charged with involvement in terrorist
acts in this country.
If the government had such evidence,
it would be taking them to court here.
The men being detained are not said
to be involved in the 7/7 or 21/7 bombings.
If the government had such evidence,
it would be taking them to court here.
These men have not been, and are not
going to be, charged with involvement in a terrorist act,
or in any other criminal act.
Shami
Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty: "What separates
us from the terrorists is that we do not torture people
or send them to be tortured. It should take more than self
serving assurances to demonstrate that countries with a
human rights record such as Jordan's are safe. Now is not
the time for our Judges to be cowed by the impudent warnings
of populist politicians. It
is far better for public safety that a terrorist suspect
be tried than shuffled around the world."
The
Independent (editorial, page 30): "In a law-governed
state which prides itself on its tolerance of free speech
and its respect for right, anyone suspected of involvement
in terrorism should be charged, tried and judged under the
law as it stands. Anything
else is a betrayal of what we stand for."
2) THIS IS NOT A THREAT TO THE LIFE
OF THE NATION
We are not facing a 'threat to the
life of the nation' (see Lord Hoffmann's remarks, excerpted
Wednesday).
Suggestions for more talking points
welcome. This page will
be updated, probably on Sunday.
JNV welcomes feedback.
This page last updated 12 August 2005
|