Human Rights, Democracy and Governance group
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

By e-mail to HRDGGenquiries@fco.gov.uk
30th March 2007

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to request a formal statement from the Foreign Office regarding HM Government’s position on the legality and human right implications of the US Military Tribunals currently interviewing and trying suspects in Guantanamo Bay. I have read your department’s standard response to letters regarding Guantanamo however; this document does not cover the latest status of the reactivated Military Tribunals and their ability and potential to convict and sentence prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Earlier this month a prisoner, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was forced to attend a status review conducted by such a military tribunal during which he made allegations of abuse during his imprisonment and confessed to a string of terrorism offences. KSH, was not permitted a lawyer, was not permitted to hear all the evidence against him and was denied access to the witnesses (also detained at Guantanamo) he requested be present. No independent media observed the tribunal and the names of the Military officers participating in the review meeting have been redacted from the transcript, including the officer who certifies the transcript as correct and accurate! Evidence obtained during torture (duress in US military parlance) is permitted and accepted by the tribunal.

Even if we ignore the appalling precedents the creation of such tribunals represents, operating outside of all constitutional and military legal systems, the denial of basic legal rights at a hearing in which the evidence and confession KSM presented may be used in the future to convict and sentence him to death are travesties. There is no evidence that KSM had access to legal council prior to making his confession although there is compelling evidence that he was subjected to “Water-Boarding” and other torture techniques during his detention by the American government. During the course of his captivity, his two young children were detained in Pakistan and transferred to the custody of American agents – KSM was made aware of the fact that his children were in the custody of US agents during his interrogations and torture.

Further to KSM’s status review, the Australian David Hicks has had his case reviewed and subsequently been convicted on one count of providing material aid to the terrorism, after pleading guilty. Two of Hick’s lawyers were barred from the court, one of them because “he agreed to abide by all “existent” rules, but refused to agree to “all” rules for the tribunal without first knowing what those rules stated. According to the judge, this ran afoul of civilian counsel’s obligations to agree to military regulations governing representation – regulations which have not yet been issued.” Via HRW .

Hick’s could not have his own lawyer defend him because that lawyer insisted on seeing the laws and rules of the court beforehand - apart from Zimbabwe I cannot imagine another British based legal system which would tolerate such despicable disregard for the fundamental principles of justice. It now appears that David Hicks has entered into a plea deal where the US officials offered to reduce his sentence on condition that he drops his claims of torture and abuse whilst detained. The US government is buying his silence after convicting him in a kangaroo court. His sentence stipulates that he may not talk to the media for a year, not to sell his story and not to sue the US government. These types of conditions are not legitimate criminal or military punishments, but naked political conditions imposed through a blatant abuse of power. If this occurred in Zimbabwe, my government would be rightly and publicly outraged. Yet when one of our closest allies repeatedly disgraces itself in this manner, we are silent.

Where is the moral outrage from my government? Since we last expressed our mild displeasure at the US Administration, they have proceeded to commit further blatant and despicable human rights abuses, the latest being the military tribunals at Guantanamo. More outrages will inevitably follow. Behind the scenes, scores of innocent men have been released without charge, compensation or apology. Yet all official US Administration and Military references to detainees at Guantanamo infer that all prisoners are “terrorists”, when clearly they are not. In such a politically motivated and managed environment it is impossible for these men to obtain fair trials.

The physical and legal abuses that have occurred at Guantanamo Bay will stain the reputation of the USA as a defender of Human Rights for the next 50 years. Through our ongoing cooperation with the US and our muted public responses in the face on continued abuse, years after we first meekly denounced the USA’s behavior as unacceptable, we undermine our own credibility.

Yours sincerely


AJ Bladderwait

PS I believe that it is important that the FCO carries both sides of the argument in its web-site statement on Guantanamo. However, your organization looks quite ridiculous when giving such prominence to the flat denials by Condoleezza Rice regarding the US’s well documented crimes of torture and rendition. I’d suggest that you either remove her comments or document the numerous credible counter claims and pending European prosecutions – otherwise your own credibility is called into question.