May, 14 2010, 11:18am EDT
UK: Make Rights a Priority at Home and Abroad
New Government Should Open Inquiry into Allegations of Complicity in Torture
LONDON
The new Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government
should re-establish Britain's reputation as a champion of human rights
by opening a judicial inquiry into allegations of complicity in torture
and by affirming support for the Human Rights Act, Human Rights Watch
said today.
"The two parties in government have indicated they are in
substantial agreement on civil liberties," said Tom Porteous, London
director at Human Rights Watch. "They should translate that into
practice by making a clean break with the previous government's abusive
approach to counterterrorism and by strengthening the UK's role in
bringing to justice those responsible for international crimes at home
and abroad."
Allegations of complicity by UK intelligence services in the
kidnapping and torture of terrorism suspects, including UK nationals,
have badly damaged the UK's reputation as a nation that respects human
rights, Human Rights Watch said. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on
Human Rights (JCHR) and the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee
have both issued critical reports about this issue. The JCHR, the All
Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition, the Liberal
Democrat Party and several Conservative Members of Parliament have
called for a judicial inquiry.
"An abusive approach to counterterrorism is also a counterproductive
approach," Porteous said. "There's an urgent need to open a thorough
and rapid judicial inquiry into these allegations of torture. Anyone
found responsible for wrongdoing should be held accountable."
In opposition the Conservative and the Liberal Democrat parties both
called for a review of counterterrorism legislation. Human Rights Watch
urged the government make good on its promises of reform by allowing
the 28 days pre-charge detention power to lapse when it comes up for
annual renewal in July, and by committing itself in the first Queen's
speech to the repeal of the discredited system of control orders.
A comprehensive and speedy review of counterterrorism laws and
policies should include a reconsideration of the policy under which
terrorism suspects can be deported to countries where they risk being
tortured, Human Rights Watch said. Research by Human Rights Watch has
shown that the policy, known as "deportations with assurances,"
breaches the UK's human rights obligations.
Human Rights Watch also urged the incoming coalition government to
affirm its support for the Human Rights Act. Since it was introduced by
the Labour government in 1998, the Human Rights Act has delivered
practical benefits and protections against excessive state power.
However, it has come under sustained attack both from the media and
from politicians of the right and left since it was introduced in 1998.
The Liberal Democrat Party has supported the Human Rights Act, but the
Conservative Party pledged in its manifesto to replace it with a Bill
of Rights.
"The attacks on the Human Rights Act are mostly based on myths and
misconceptions," said Porteous. "The Act reflects long-standing
traditions on law in the UK, including the presumption of innocence,
the right to liberty, the right to a fair hearing and the prohibition
of torture. The new ministers should pledge to support the Human Rights
Act and govern according to its principles. Scrapping the Act would
signal that the UK was turning its back on human rights."
One achievement of UK policy under Labour was its support for
international criminal justice, including its support for the creation
of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002. Human Rights Watch
urged the new government to reaffirm its support for the ICC and for
the broader principles of international justice that underpin it,
namely accountability for grave international crimes such as torture
and war crimes. There has been growing evidence during the past year of
torture, deaths and other serious abuses of detainees by British forces
during the occupation of Iraq.
The new government should ensure that British nationals or anyone in
British territory against whom there is evidence of responsibility for
international crimes are investigated and either prosecuted in British
courts or extradited to countries that will prosecute them. Currently
the Attorney General, a government minister, has the power to veto any
prosecution for international crimes.
"The UK needs to ensure that accountability for war crimes is not
just for a few African warlords and dictators," Porteous said. "The new
government should ensure that British police and prosecutors can and
will independently investigate and prosecute those responsible for
torture and other international crimes without interference from
ministers."
The UK has been considering proposals to curtail the authority of
British courts to issue arrest warrants initiated by private parties
under universal jurisdiction, the legal principle by which certain
crimes, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, can be
prosecuted in any jurisdiction. Human Rights Watch urged the government
to retain the right for private individuals to apply for such warrants,
which are only issued after a senior judge is satisfied that there is
credible evidence of wrongdoing, and which serve as an important
mechanism to allow prompt action when alleged war criminals are present
in the UK.
An important concern of UK voters during the election campaign was
immigration and asylum. But there has been little attention from
politicians or the media to the human rights costs of current UK
immigration and asylum policies. In particular, Human Rights Watch's
research has shown that the "Detained Fast Track" asylum procedure is
dysfunctional and unfit to deal with complex refugee claims that go
through it regularly. Human Rights Watch urged the new government to
reform this part of the asylum system in accordance with the right to a
full and fair examination of asylum claims, and to ensure that any
changes to the asylum system enhance access to protection for those
fleeing persecution overseas.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Vermont Sued for New Law Requiring Big Oil to Pay for Climate Damage
'For too long, giant fossil fuel companies have knowingly lit the match of climate disruption'
Jan 05, 2025
The US Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute - representing the biggest fossil fuel companies in the world - are suing the State of Vermont over its new law requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a share of the state's damage caused by climate change.
The lawsuit, filed last Monday in the US District Court for the District of Vermont, asks a state court to prevent Vermont from enforcing the law passed last year. Vermont became the first state in the country to enact the law after it suffered over $1 billion in damages from catastrophic summer flooding and other extreme weather.
Vermont’s Attorney General’s Office said as of Friday, Jan. 3, they had not been served with the lawsuit.
The lawsuit argues that the U.S. Constitution precludes the act and that the federal Clean Air Act preempts state law. It also claims that the law violates domestic and foreign commerce clauses by discriminating “against the important interest of other states by targeting large energy companies located outside of Vermont.”
The Chamber and the American Petroleum Institute argue that the federal government is already addressing climate change. Because greenhouse gases come from billions of individual sources, they claim it has been impossible to measure “accurately and fairly” the impact of emissions from a particular entity in a specific location over decades.
“For too long, giant fossil fuel companies have knowingly lit the match of climate disruption without being required to do a thing to put out the fire,” Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, said in a statement. “Finally, maybe for the first time anywhere, Vermont is going to hold the companies most responsible for climate-driven floods, fires and heat waves financially accountable for a fair share of the damages they’ve caused.”
The complaint is an essential legal test as more states consider holding fossil fuels liable for expensive global warming-intensified events like floods, fires, and more. Maryland and Massachusetts are among the states expected to pursue similar legislation, modeled after the federal law known as Superfund, in 2025.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed a similar climate bill into law - the Climate Change Superfund Act- on Dec. 26, pointing to the need to fund climate adaptation projects.
Downtown Montpelier, Vermont was under water on Monday, July 10, 2023 caused by the flooding of the Winooski River. (Photo: John Tully for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Heavy Rains Cause Catastrophic Flooding In Southern Vermont (Photo by Scott Eisen/Getty Images)
Flooding is seen in downtown Montpelier, Vermont (Photo: John Tully for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Keep ReadingShow Less
Renowned Washington Post Cartoonist Quits After Refusal to Publish Critique of Jeff Bezos
Jan 04, 2025
Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes has resigned from the Washington Post, where she has worked since 2008, due to what she claims was editorial interference.
Telnaes claimed an editor at the paper killed her draft cartoon depicting Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos and other billionaire tech and media chief executives groveling on their knees at the feet of President-elect Donald Trump.
Along with Bezos, Telnaes depicted Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman bringing Trump sacks of cash. Los Angeles Times owner and billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong was shown with a tube of lipstick.
In a post to her Substack, Telnaes wrote:
“I have had editorial feedback and productive conversations – and some differences – about cartoons I have submitted for publication, but in all that time, I’ve never had a cartoon killed because of who or what I chose to aim my pen at. Until now.”
"As an editorial cartoonist, my job is to hold powerful people and institutions accountable. For the first time, my editor prevented me from doing that critical job. So I have decided to leave the Post. I doubt my decision will cause much of a stir and that it will be dismissed because I’m just a cartoonist. But I will not stop holding truth to power through my cartooning because, as they say, “Democracy dies in darkness.”
Over three hundred thousand people canceled their digital subscriptions after Jeff Bezos decided to squash a Washington Post endorsement of Kamala Harris in October.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Greenlights 'Racist' and 'Sociopathic' $8B Arms Sale to Israel
Multiple human rights organizations and international bodies have accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza
Jan 04, 2025
The administration of US President Joe Biden announced on Saturday an arms sale to Israel valued at $8 billion, just ahead of President-elect Donald Trump's return to the White House.
Biden has repeatedly rejected calls to suspend military backing for Israel because of the number of civilians killed during the war in Gaza. Israel has killed more than 45,000 people in Gaza, primarily women and children.
The sale includes medium-range air-to-air missiles, 155mm projectile artillery shells for long-range targeting, Hellfire AGM-114 missiles, 500-pound bombs, and more.
Human rights groups, former State Department officials, and Democratic lawmakers have urged the Biden administration to halt arms sales to Israel, citing violations of US laws, including the Leahy Law, as well as international laws and human rights.
The Leahy Law, named after former Sen. Patrick Leahy, requires the US to withhold military assistance from foreign military or law enforcement units if there is credible evidence of human rights violations.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s most significant Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today called Biden’s new $8 billion arms deal “racist” and “sociopathic.”
Multiple human rights organizations and international bodies have accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for committing war crimes.
The US is, by far, the biggest supplier of weapons to Israel, having helped it build one of the most technologically sophisticated militaries in the world.
CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said on Saturday:
“We strongly condemn the Biden administration for its unbelievable and criminal decision to send another $8 billion worth of American weapons to the government of indicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu instead of using American leverage to force an end to the genocide in Gaza.
“Only racists who do not view people of color as equally human, and sociopaths who delight in funding mass slaughter, could send Netanyahu even more bombs while his government openly kidnaps doctors, destroys hospitals, and exterminates the last survivors in northern Gaza.
“If President Biden is actually the person who approved this new $8 billion arms sale, then he is a war criminal who belongs in a cell at The Hague alongside Netanyahu. But if Antony Blinken, Brett McGurk, Jake Sullivan, and other aides are making these unconscionable decisions as shadow presidents, then anyone with a conscience in the administration should speak up now about their abuses of power.”
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the US accounted for 69% of Israel's imports of major conventional arms between 2019 and 2023.
On the other hand, incoming President-elect Donald Trump has also pledged unwavering support for Israel and has never committed to supporting an independent Palestinian state.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular