Binyam Mohamed is the last British resident remaining in Guantanamo Bay. Like many Guantanamo detainees, he has been the victim of extraordinary rendition and torture and instead of being granted access to justice, Mr. Mohamed now faces a US Military Commission which could sentence him to death.

Binyam’s saga does not end there. In civil courts, an accused person has the right to adduce evidence vital to his defence so as to ensure a fair trial. Unfortunately, in Military Commission ‘trials’ the situation is different. Often, defendants are denied the opportunity to access, examine and respond to, any evidence against them if such information is deemed ‘classified’. Similarly, evidence that is beneficial to their case may never be presented in court.

Mr. Mohamed’s lawyers contend that the case against him is based on evidence extracted by torture and coercion following his rendition by the CIA. In order to prove their defence, lawyers had asked the Foreign Office (UK) to release information on his movements, claiming that such information demonstrates the British government’s knowledge of Binyam’s rendition to Morocco, where he was allegedly tortured.

Government lawyers had answered a previous defence request, saying "the UK is under no obligation under international law to assist foreign courts and tribunals in assuring that torture evidence is not admitted". Now, defence lawyers are seeking judicial review in the UK to force the Foreign Office to release this crucial information.

The United Kingdom is a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). Article 15 of the CAT states: 'Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.'

In this case, the UK has abandoned its commitment to the Convention and has flatly refused to afford a British resident any protection against unfair prosecution. Mr. Mohamed’s lawyer put it best: 'It beggars belief that they will not lift a finger to help a British resident when he may face the death penalty.'

By Alim Khamis

Share

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• What are these?

Efforts to combat terrorism do not need to come at the cost of human rights. A secure community is one where human rights are respected. Yet the 'war on terror' has been used by the US and its allies as an excuse to condone torture.

© David Herthnek.

Help to build secure community - one in which human rights are respected - by donating today.