Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Tony Blair Knew of Secret Policy on Terror Interrogations
Letter reveals former PM was aware of guidance to UK agents
Tony Blair was aware of the existence of a secret interrogation policy which effectively led to British citizens, and others, being tortured during counter-terrorism investigations, the Guardian can reveal.
Former British Prime Minister and Middle East quartet representative Tony Blair in Washington, May 14, 2009. (REUTERS/Jason Reed/Files) The policy, devised in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, offered guidance to MI5 and MI6 officers questioning detainees in Afghanistan who they knew were being mistreated by the US military.
British intelligence officers were given written instructions that they could not "be seen to condone" torture and that they must not "engage in any activity yourself that involves inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners".
But they were also told they were not under any obligation to intervene to prevent detainees from being mistreated.
"Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this," the policy said.
The policy almost certainly breaches international human rights law, according to Philippe Sands QC, one of the world's leading experts in the field, because it takes no account of Britain's obligations to avoid complicity in torture under the UN convention against torture. Despite this, the secret policy went on to underpin British intelligence's relationships with a number of foreign intelligence agencies which had become the UK's allies in the "war against terror".
The policy was set out in written instructions sent to MI5 and MI6 officers in January 2002, which told them they might consider complaining to US officials about the mistreatment of detainees "if circumstances allow".
Blair indicated his awareness of the existence of the policy in the middle of 2004, a few weeks after publication of photographs depicting the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
It was around this time, David Miliband, the foreign secretary, told MPs on Tuesday, that the policy was changed, becoming more "comprehensive and formal".
In a letter to the intelligence and security committee (ISC), the group of MPs and peers that provides political oversight of the UK's security and intelligence services, on May 24 2004, Blair said that rather than considering making a complaint, "UK intelligence personnel interviewing or witnessing the interviews of detainees are instructed to report if they believe detainees are being treated in an inhumane or degrading way".
The Guardian has learned from a reliable source that MI5 officers are now instructed that if a detainee tells them that he or she is being tortured they should never return to question that person.
It remains unclear what Blair knew of the policy's consequences. The Guardian has repeatedly asked him what role he played in approving the policy, whether he was aware that it had led to people being tortured, and whether he made any attempt to change it.
His spokesman said: "It is completely untrue that Mr Blair has ever authorised the use of torture. He is opposed to it in all circumstances. Neither has he ever been complicit in the use of torture.
"For the record, also, Mr Blair believes that our security services do a superb job of protecting our country in difficult circumstances and that it is not surprising following the attacks of September 11 2001 that there was a heightened sense of the dangers the country faced from terrorism. None of this amounts to condoning the use of torture."
When the Guardian pointed out to Blair that it had not suggested he had authorised the use of torture, but had asked whether he had played any role in the approval of a policy that led to people being tortured, his spokesman replied: "Tony Blair does not condone torture, has never authorised it nor colluded in it at any time." But there is growing evidence of MI5's collusion in the torture of British terrorism suspects in Pakistan, where officers of the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI), an agency whose routine use of torture has been widely documented, were asked by MI5 to detain British citizens and put questions to them prior to an interrogation by MI5 officers.
Two high court judges say they have seen "powerful evidence" of the torture of Binyam Mohamed, the British resident who returned from Guantánamo Bay in February, before he was questioned by an MI5 officer in May 2002.
In a separate case, a court has heard that MI5 and Greater Manchester police drew up a list of questions to be put to another man, Rangzieb Ahmed, who was detained by the ISI in August 2006, despite having reason to believe that he was in danger of being tortured.
By the time Ahmed was deported to the UK after a lengthy period of unlawful detention three of his fingernails were missing.
Several other men have come forward to say they were questioned by British intelligence officers after suffering brutal torture at the hands of Pakistani agents, and there have been similar allegations of British collusion in the torture of British citizens in Egypt, Bangladesh and the United Arab Emirates.
While a small number of the victims were subsequently tried and convicted in the UK, most were released without charge.
International concern about Britain's involvement in torture has been mounting for some time. In February Martin Scheinin, a UN special rapporteur on human rights, reported that British intelligence personnel had "interviewed detainees who were held incommunicado by the Pakistani ISI in so-called safe houses, where they were being tortured".
Scheinin added that this "can be reasonably understood as implicitly condoning torture."
In March, after the Guardian disclosed the existence of the interrogation policy, and reported on the growing number of allegations of British collusion in torture, Gordon Brown announced that the policy was to be rewritten by the ISC.
In what was seen at Westminster as an acknowledgement that the secret policy had been open to abuse, Brown also pledged that the rewritten policy would be made public and that a former appeal court judge would monitor the intelligence agencies' compliance with it, and report to the prime minister each year.
On Tuesday Miliband said the existing policy, as amended in 2004, would not be published.
But the discovery that Blair was aware of the secret interrogation policy appears certain to fuel the growing demand for an independent inquiry into aspects of the UK's role in torture and rendition.
So far, those who have called for such an inquiry include the Conservative and Liberal Democrat leaders David Cameron and Nick Clegg; Ken Macdonald, a former director of public prosecutions; Lord Carlile of Berriew, the government's independent reviewer of counter-terrorism legislation; Lord Howe, who was foreign secretary between 1983 and 1989 in the Thatcher government; and Lord Guthrie, a former chief of defence staff.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



21 Comments so far
Show AllI remember when the British Labour Party was a true working class party and one of the most progressive parties in the world. Then Toady Blair gained control and moved the Party so far to the right that it has just become another capitalist party with all the warts that implies. Toady Blair will go down in history as the asshole and liar he really is. The British working class needs to take back that party and move it back to its leftwing roots.
The British have made use of the Americans time and again - often initiating the idea for various covert and overt actions, and have benefited from American military and covert operations. While the blame has gone largely to the U.S., in comparison, the Brits have tried hard to maintain a 'clean' image. Read the book "Web of Deceit: Britain's Real Role in the World" by Mark Curtis. John Pilger (www.johnpilger.com) is another journalist who routinely exposes Britain's role in various international affairs. So it's not just about Tony Blair (although the nickname 'Phony Blair' is perfect for him), and it's amusing to see the Tories suddenly championing human rights.
That the Tories dare to, and have legitimate grounds to, attack a Labour government on human rights, shows how far Labour has fallen.
Harold Wilson once said that the Labour Party is either a moral crusade or it is nothing. It has become nothing.
Good comments above, (now below); I have another very American nickname for Tony "Baloney". We now have public confirmation of what many have known and suspected for quite sometime now. David Milliband, current FM and sycophantic follower of Tony, is just as bad.
The political situation between Cs and Ls in the UK reminds me of the Ds and Rs here in the US. Both countries have many elements of political culture in common, for obvious reasons. One of those similarities is a winner-takes-all (first past the post in UK terminology) voting system and a ruling duopoly of Covervative/NewLabour. One could argue that there is a viable LibDem party in the UK, however when was the last time a non C/L party won an election and formed a govt.? Just like the D/R ruling duopoly there is very little substantive difference between the policy platforms of both parties, which I find quite interesting.
Nice essay, but no news. We all knew Blair was a filthy little war criminal. But what does he care? He is on his way to a lucrative "speaking engagement" right now, probably.
Poor Britain is in the same boat we're in. Both their major parties have run out of gas. Labor is rightly vilified for its reign, particularly Blair (arguably a war criminal) and the hapless Gordon Brown, but neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems seem to have any workable solutions. maybe it's time for the Silly Party to take over. Or maybe our anglo-saxon 'civilization' both in Britain and the US have run out of ideas altogether. It will be interesting to see what happens in Britain in the next year until the election.
Both the Lib Dems, and the Greens, do have leftish solutions.
Don't blame the Lib Dems or the Greens. Blame the voters, on the left, who are still blindly loyal to Labour. Labour disgusts them, so instead of voting for other leftish parties, they simply don't vote. Or they hope that Gordon Brown will change his ways. Or they hope that some replacement of Brown can change Labour's behaviour overnight. Etc.
Gordon Brown isn't simply hapless. He was, and is, as much of a part of putting Labour where they are now as Tony Blair. His differences with Blair came down essentially to personality and power, not policy.
And there are no quick solutions for Labour. The entire leadership of Labour is not leftish at all. Jack Straw, the Millibands, Ed Balls, Alan Johnson, Harriet Harman, etc, none of them are leftish. Politically they are all little different from Blair / Brown.
The Lib Dems are certainly no saints, but on a whole range of policies, they do provide a viable leftish alternative to the Tories or Labour. Something that does not exist in the US.
This pic of Blair sorta looks like Gore before he got fat.
hey tony blair - you say you meant well.
so how come you fear you'll end up in hell?
a fine catholic man you claim to be,
but your name will be damned for eternity.
Hey, Tony Blair - did you see that fly Obama dispatched?
It came out of your backside from whence it was hatched.
Tony Blair--what a lousy excuse for a human being.
I thought the photo was of Michael Bloomberg. Blair's not looking too good these days.
Blair, Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Wolfy...they'd make good cellmates!
Should they hang together or seperately?
Tony B. Liar certainly betrayed the British Commonwealth.
The worst bit of advice Bill Clinton ever gave Tony Blair was to get friendly with Dubya. That Blair fully went along with Dubya, Cheney, & Co.'s craziness, and participated in it bespeaks quite poorly of what was supposed to be a keen political instinct. Should a Nuremberg style proceeding ever come about regarding the crimes of the Bush error, Blair deserves a seat on the dock along with the rest of the crooks.
blair and joe biden tried to convince clinton to invade iraq back in the nineties.
poodle indeed.
and now blair's replacement brown will investigate the war, behind closed doors.
hey gordon brown, what did you buy?
you let tony sell you some pie in the sky.
you signed all the cheques, bought all the bombs.
gave my money away for nothing but tombs.
Tonya Blair was Georgie Boys girlfriend.
'"Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this," the policy said.'
I don't even know whether this is true, or which particular law is being cherry-picked -- my own feeling is that it is not true -- but even if it were, what poor sort of an excuse for a human being would stand by and let it happen? Soldiers of the Queen? The best and bravest Britain has? I would have hoped she had better than that.
Blair was appointed UN Peace Ambassador to the Middle East (or some such pork-barrel title). Can anyone else see the irony of that? The Hon Tony Blair. Honorable? I don't think so.
And even if he can argue his way out of this, he is nonetheless a war criminal for helping to invade Iraq.
I concur.
Britain, as signator to the international anti-torture treaty, is obligated to prosecute.
As agents of the Westminster Gov any who witness torture are morally bound to report such.
If they had morals.
Looking nicely tanned in the pic, Tony. Spending a lot of time by the pool these days?
well yeah, sure. But is this news? will we learn tomorrow that he knew Iraq did not have any nukes?