DOCSLIB.ORG

KHRP Legal Review 7

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
KHRP Legal Review 7 THE KURDISH Human Rights PROJECT Legal Review (2005) 7 KHRP LR June 2005 The Kurdish Human Rights Project The Kurdish Human Rights Project (KHRP) is an independent, non-political, non-governmental human rights organisation founded and based in London, England. KHRP is a registered charity and is committed to the promotion and protection of the human rights of all persons living within the Kurdish regions, irrespective of race, religion, sex, political persuasion or other belief or opinion. Its supporters include both Kurdish and non-Kurdish people. AIMS • To promote awareness of the situation of the Kurds in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey and elsewhere • To bring an end to the violation of the rights of the Kurds in these countries • To promote the protection of human rights of Kurdish people everywhere METHODS • Monitoring legislation and its application • Conducting investigations and producing reports on the human rights situation of Kurds in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and in the countries of the former Soviet Union by, amongst other methods, sending trial observers and engaging in fact-finding missions • Using such reports to promote awareness of the plight of the Kurds on the part of committees established under human rights treaties to monitor compliance of states • Using such reports to promote awareness of the plight of the Kurds on the part of the European Parliament, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, national parliamentary bodies and inter-governmental organisations including the United Nations • Liaison with other independent human rights organisations working in the same field and co-operating with lawyers, journalists and others concerned with human rights • Assisting individuals with their applications before the European Court of Human Rights • Offering assistance to indigenous human rights groups and lawyers in the form of advice and training seminars on international human rights mechanisms Kurdish Human Rights Project 2 New Burlington Place, London, W1S 2HP, England Tel: +44 20 7287 2772 Fax: +44 20 7734 4927 Email: [email protected] www.khrp.org (2005) 7 KHRP Legal Review THE KURDISH Human Rights PROJECT Legal Review (2005) 7 KHRP LR June 2005 3 KHRP LEGAL REVIEW The Kurdish Human Rights Project (KHRP) is an independent, non-political, non-governmental human rights organisation founded and based in London, England. KHRP is a registered charity and is committed to the promotion and protection of the human rights of all persons living within the Kurdish regions, irrespective of race, religion, sex, political persuasion or other belief or opinion. Its supporters include both Kurdish and non-Kurdish people. Acknowledgements The Kurdish Human Rights Project gratefully acknowledges the financial support of: The Sigrid Rausing Trust (UK), Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Netherlands), Open Society Institute (USA), Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs (Finland), Oak Foundation (USA), ACAT Suisse- Action des Chrétiens pour I’Abolition de la Torture (Switzerland), Allan and Nesta Ferguson Charitable Trust (UK), Atlantic Philanthropies (USA), C.B. & H.H. Taylor 1984 Trust (UK), Environmental Defense Fund (USA), Fulmer Charitable Trust (UK), Law Society Charity (UK), Oakdale Trust (UK), Rowan Charitable Trust (UK), Stiching Cizera Botan (Netherlands), World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) (Switzerland), The AB Charitable Trust (UK), The Bromley Trust (UK), and UN Voluntary Fund for Torture (Switzerland). Submissions for consideration by the Editorial Board should be sent to: KHRP Legal Review Kurdish Human Rights Project 2 New Burlington Place, London, W1S 2HP, England Tel: +44 20 7287 2772 Fax: +44 20 7734 4927 Email: [email protected] Communications regarding proposed articles should be addressed to the Editorial Board at the address above or [email protected]. Contributors are encouraged to contact the relevant editors regarding drafts or proposed contributions with abstracts of proposed articles preferred. Layout & Design: Torske & Sterling Legal Marketing www.torske.co.uk Printed in Great Britain June 2005 Published by the Kurdish Human Rights Project ISSN 1748-0639 All rights reserved (2005) 7 KHRP Legal Review Board of Patrons Advisory Group Geoffrey Bindman William Archer (Theatre Producer) George Black Bill Bowring (Professor) Hans Branscheidt Louise Christian (Solicitor) Noam Chomsky Jane Connors (Lecturer) Julie Christie Alice Faure Walker (Solicitor) Nazmi Gür Julie Flint (Journalist) Paul Hoffman Malcolm Harper 2 New Burlington Place Bianca Jagger Gillian Higgins (Barrister) Baroness Helena Kennedy QC Philip Kirkpatrick (Solicitor) London W1S 2HP Bruce Kent Laurence Lustgarten (Professor) Lord Kirkhill David McDowall (Writer) Tel: +44 20 7287 2772 Michael Mansfield QC Chris Milroy MD (Forensic Pathologist) Ian Macdonald QC Caroline Nolan (Solicitor) Fax: +44 20 7734 4927 Harold Pinter Nathalie Prouvez (Lawyer) Lord Rea Fiona Ripley (Solicitor) Email: [email protected] Bernice Rubens Colin Wells (Barrister) Jon Rud http://www.khrp.org Daniel Serin MD Women and Children Programme Klaus Slavensky Consultant Per Stadig Willem Van Genugten Margaret Owen (Barrister) Sanar Yurdatapan Leo Zwaak Legal Review Editorial Board Mark Muller Kerim Yildiz Tim Otty Nicholas Stewart QC KHRP Legal Team Philip Leach Lucy Claridge David Anderson QC; Michael Birnbaum QC; Andrew Collender QC; Ben Rochelle Harris Emmerson QC; Sydney Kentridge QC; Keir Starmer QC; Nicholas Stewart Anke Stock QC; Mark Muller, barrister; Professor Bill Bowring; Miriam Benitez-Carrion, barrister; Parosha Chandran, barrister; Louis Charalambous, solicitor; Louise Honorary President Christian, solicitor; Fiona Darroch, barrister; Tim Eicke, barrister; Joanna Evans, Lord Avebury barrister; Alice Faure Walker, solicitor; Edward Grieves, barrister; Matthew Happold; Gill Higgins, barrister; Andrea Hopkins, barrister; Arild Humlen, Executive Director barrister; Murray Hunt, barrister; Chris Jacob, barrister; Ajanta Kaza, barrister; Kerim Yildiz Stuart Kerr, barrister; Philip Kirkpatrick, solicitor; Philip Leach, solicitor; Fiona McKay, solicitor; Ola Maeland, barrister; Sajjad Nabi, barrister; Caroline Nolan, Board of Directors solicitor; Hugo Norton-Taylor, barrister; Declan O’Callaghan, barrister; Mark Chairman Mark Muller (Barrister) O’Connor, barrister; Øvind Østberg, barrister; Tim Otty, barrister; Gita Parihar, Michael Ivers (Barrister) solicitor; Gareth Peirce, solicitor; Rajesh Rai, barrister; Knut Rognlien, barrister; Julian Ozanne (Journalist) Michael Rollason, barrister; Jon Rud, barrister; Jessica Simor, barrister; Jemima Gareth Peirce (Solicitor) Stratford, barrister; Colin Wells, barrister; Chris Williams, barrister; Nigel Wray, Paul Lewis (Editor) barrister; Emin Aktar; Yusuf Alatas; Cihan Aydin; Osman Baydemir; Orhan Kemal Cengiz; Tahir Elci; Osman Ergin; John Guess; Metin Kilavuz; Nuri Legal Consultant Ozmen; Paul Richmond; Kenan Sidar; Sezgin Tanrikulu; Sinan Tanrikulu and Tim Otty (Barrister) Reyhan Yalçindag Representative in Scandinavia KHRP is a Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England No. 2922108. Prof. Haci Akman Registered Charity No. 1037236. 5 (2005) 7 KHRP Legal Review Contents Page No. Abbreviations 17 Section 1: Legal Developments & News Council of Europe adopts three new Conventions 19 Ratification of ECHR Protocol No. 14 19 ECtHR: Election of new judges for Serbia & Montenegro and Latvia 19 UN approves new watchdog on minorities 19 China, Russia and USA undermine the establishment of a UN 20 Special Rapporteur on protecting human rights in counterterrorism efforts Azerbaijan: Presidential Decree pardons 114 people imprisoned for 20 criminal offences Municipal elections in Azerbaijan fall short of international standards 21 Registration of NGOs in Azerbaijan remains problematic 21 OSCE Trial Monitoring Report: trials in Azerbaijan do not comply 22 with international human rights standards Azerbaijan signs new programme regarding discrimination against 22 women Protests continue against the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline 22 7 (2005) 7 KHRP Legal Review Minsk Group report on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict 23 Armenia: amendments to laws concerning freedom of assembly 23 Turkey: EU agrees accession negotiations despite continuing lack 23 of respect for human rights CEDAW releases recommendations regarding discrimination 24 against women in Turkey Recent nationalist activity in Turkey: human rights lawyers 25 receive death threats Iraqi Presidential and legislative elections 25 Trials of former Iraqi leaders 26 Violent repression against women’s demonstrations in Iran 26 Amnesty granted to Syrian Kurds arrested in 2004 27 The trials of Ferhat Kaya 29 Catriona Vine Barrister, 10-11 Gray’s Inn Square Relatives of human rights defenders at risk: the extra-judicial 35 killing of Siyar Perinçek Joanna Wood Barrister 10-11 Gray’s Inn Square Freedom of expression at risk 39 Mary Hughes & Mark Himsworth Barristers, 10-11 Gray’s Inn Square 8 (2005) 7 KHRP Legal Review The EU, Turkey and the Kurds 41 Lucy Claridge Legal Officer, KHRP The evolution of the right to life by the European Court of 43 Human Rights Stuart E. Hendin QC, Barrister and Solicitor in international and Canadian law Iraq and the legal space of the European Convention on Human 77 Rights Nusrat Chagtai Public Interest Lawyers Charting the gradual emergence of a more robust level of 87 minority protection: minority specific instruments and the European Union Kristin Henrard Associate Professor, University of Groningen, the Netherlands Sanandaj
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE DEATH of BAHA MOUSA the Death of Baha Mousa GERRY SIMPSON*
    THE DEATH OF BAHA MOUSA The Death of Baha Mousa GERRY SIMPSON* [Between March 2003 and September 2004, 100 000 Iraqis are believed to have died as a consequence of the invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003. Baha Mousa, an Iraqi hotel clerk was one of them. Mr Mousa died in Basra on or around 15 September 2003, after sustaining 93 separate injuries while in the custody of British soldiers belonging to the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment. This think piece is about the law produced and invoked by his death.] CONTENTS I Introduction II Unlawful Conditioning III Common Law Crime IV War Crime V Human Rights Violation VI Baha Mousa How violent Schultz had sounded over the telephone. ‘I want justice,’ he had said. I wonder how many murders have been committed, and how many wars have been fought with that as a slogan … Justice is a thing that is better to give than to receive, but I am sick of giving it … I think it should be a prerogative of the gods.1 I INTRODUCTION On 14 September 2003, in Basra, southern Iraq, a hotel receptionist named Baha Mousa2 was detained by soldiers of the British Army’s Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment. Mousa and several other Iraqis were brought to a detention facility operated by the United Kingdom Armed Forces, and formerly run by Saddam Hussein’s cousin, Ali Hassann al-Majid, better known as ‘Chemical Ali’. Thirty-six hours later, Mr Mousa’s family were informed that Mr Mousa had died during detention. A subsequent post-mortem revealed that he had received 93 separate injuries, including a broken nose and fractured ribs — other prisoners suffered serious kidney damage.3 The reaction (on the part of the military, the legal profession, the media and the British establishment) to this incident tells us a little about the way * Gerry Simpson is a Professor of International Law at the London School of Economics.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorism, Counter- Terrorism and Torture
    TERRORISM, COUNTER- TERRORISM AND TORTURE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM JULY 2004 REALISED WITH FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN INITIATIVE FOR DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS The Redress Trust 87 Vauxhall Walk, 3rd Floor London, SE11 5HJ Tel: +44 (0)207 793 1777 Fax: +44(0)207 793 1719 Website: www.redress.org ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was written by Gabriela Echeverria, Legal Advisor (International), and edited by Carla Ferstman, Legal Director. REDRESS would like to express it sincere appreciation to Evelyn Sook May Yuen for her assistance in the research and preparation of this report and to Kevin Laue and Clementine Olivier for their many helpful comments on the draft of this report. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 1 PART 1. THE DISCOURSE................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 1.1. DEFINITION/NON-DEFINITION OF TERRORISM..................................................................................3 1.1.1. Defining the ‘Crime’ of Terrorism in Domestic Law .......................................................................................................4 1.1.2. Vague and Overbroad Definitions of Terrorism.............................................................................................................5 1.1.3. Defining the Crime of Terrorism: Some Principles and Guidelines of International Law ..............................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Baha Mousa Inquiry
    British Irish RIGHTS WATCH SUBMISSION TO THE BAHA MOUSA INQUIRY SEPTEMBER 2010 1 1 Introduction 1.1 British Irish RIGHTS WATCH (BIRW) is an independent non- governmental organisation that has been monitoring the human rights dimension of the conflict, and the peace process, in Northern Ireland since 1990. Our vision is of a Northern Ireland in which respect for human rights is integral to all its institutions and experienced by all who live there. Our mission is to secure respect for human rights in Northern Ireland and to disseminate the human rights lessons learned from the Northern Ireland conflict in order to promote peace, reconciliation and the prevention of conflict. BIRW’s services are available, free of charge, to anyone whose human rights have been violated because of the conflict, regardless of religious, political or community affiliations. BIRW take no position on the eventual constitutional outcome of the conflict. Our charitable ojects include the abolition of torture, extrajudicial execution, arbitrary arrest, detention and exile. 1.2 BIRW are responding to the invitation made by Sir William Gage to make submissions to the Baha Mousa Inquiry, which was instigated, as the Secretary of State for Defence has acknowledged1 not just because a man died in the custody of British soldiers but because an investigation by the Royal Military Police and a subsequent Court Martial highlighted further important questions that needed to be answered. 1.3 We are making submissions to the Baha Mousa Inquiry on the basis of our extensive experience of monitoring the human rights situation in Northern Ireland. We believe that we are in a position to offer valuable insights regarding the circumstances leading to the death of Baha Mousa and the aftermath of this tragedy given our extensive understanding of the historically analogous lessons from the conflict in Northern Ireland.
    [Show full text]
  • Internationale Terrorismusbekämpfung Und
    www.ssoar.info Internationale Terrorismusbekämpfung und Menschenrechte: Entwicklungen 2003/2004 Heinz, Wolfgang S.; Arend, Jan-Michael Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Forschungsbericht / research report Zur Verfügung gestellt in Kooperation mit / provided in cooperation with: Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Heinz, W. S., & Arend, J.-M. (2005). Internationale Terrorismusbekämpfung und Menschenrechte: Entwicklungen 2003/2004. (2. Aufl.) (Studie / Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte). Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-329762 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Weiterverbreitung - keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Redistribution - no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, non- Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, transferable, individual and limited right to using this document. persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses This document is solely intended for your personal, non- Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für commercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. all copyright information and other information regarding legal Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie document in public. dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder conditions of use.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Army in Iraq – Time to Come Clean on Civilian
    UUUUUUKKKKKK AAAAAARRRRRRMMMMMMYYYYYY IIIIIINNNNNN IIIIIIRRRRRRAAAAAAQQQQQQ:::::: TTTTIIIIMMMMEEEE TTTTOOOO CCCCOOOOMMMMEEEE CCCCLLLLEEEEAAAANNNN OOOONNNN CCCCIIIIVVVVIIIILLLLIIIIAAAANNNN TTTTOOOORRRRTTTTUUUURRRREEEE Published by the Redress Trust October 2007 87 Vauxhall Walk London, SE11 5HJ United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7793 1777 Fax: +44 (0)20 7793 1719 WEB: www.redress.org T H E R E D R E S S T R U S T ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Report was written by Kevin Laue and Adam Lang of REDRESS and edited by Carla Ferstman, REDRESS Executive Director. The cover photo is attributed to the Birmingham based law firm Public Interest Lawyers and shows the late Baha Mousa’s father in front of the High Court in London holding pictures of Baha Mousa’s children. ii U K A R M Y I N I R A Q : T I M E T O C O M E C L E A N O N C I V I L I A N T O R T U R E III ... III NNN TTT RRR OOO DDD UUU CCC TTT III OOO NNN ........................................................................................1 III III ... AAA BBB UUU SSS EEE OOO FFF CCC III VVV III LLL III AAA NNN SSS ..........................................................................3 A.A. The case of Baha Mousa & others ...........................................3 B.B. OtherOther cases ............................................................................................8 a)a) CampCamp Breadbasket ...................................................................................9 b)b) HassanHassan Abbad Said ................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • The Treatment of Detainees and the "Global War on Terror"; Selected Legal Issues
    x The Treatment of Detainees and the "Global War on Terror"; Selected Legal Issues David Turns· Introduction his article will address selected legal issues relating to the treatment of Tdetaineesl in the context of the "Global War on Terror" as a "hook" on which to hang some ideas of morc general application and significance about the international legal framework of the "war." Some general (i.e .,jusad bellum) inter­ national law aspects of the parameters of that framework have already been de­ bated in the literature/ but the perspective adopted herein is of more specialist focus inasmuch as it concentrates on the practical issue that should resonate in the mind of all coalition military and associated personnel since the disclosure of ill­ treatment of detainees in the custody of US and British forces in Iraq at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere:3 namely, once suspects in the "War on Terror" are captured, in ac­ cordance with what rules and legal standards are they to be treated? The broader, fundamental, more theoretical (but no less important) issue lurking behind this question of detailed substance is one of the utmost practical significance for per­ sonnel deployed to military counterterrorist operations in the field in the setting of the "Global War on Terror": does the "War on Terror" constitute an armed • Senior Lecturer in International Laws of Anne<! Conflict, Defence Academy of the United Kingdom. The views expressed herein are those of the author in his personal capacity. They do not necessarily represent the official views of the government or Ministry of Defence of the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Baha Mousa Public Inquiry on The
    SUBMISSION TO THE BAHA MOUSA PUBLIC INQUIRY ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE (Module 4) 13 September 2010 Contents I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2 II. Training .................................................................................................................... 4 II.1 The obligation to train .............................................................................................. 4 II.2 The meaning of personnel ........................................................................................ 5 II.3 The role and training of medical personnel .............................................................. 8 II.4 The scope of training .............................................................................................. 11 II.5 Some practice failures revealed.............................................................................. 14 III. The obligation to review interrogation rules ............................................................... 17 IV. The prevention of cruel, human or degrading treatment or punishment .................... 18 V. Investigations ............................................................................................................... 22 V.1 The obligation to investigate .................................................................................. 22 V.2 The obligation to investigate allegations promptly ................................................ 23
    [Show full text]
  • Child Soldiers and Military Actors
    CHILD SOLDIERS AND MILITARY ACTORS: A VARIATION IN DETENTION POLICIES ACROSS LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES by Iuliia Hoban A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-Newark Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Global Affairs written under the direction of Dr. Simon Reich and approved by _______________________________________________ Dr. Simon Reich _______________________________________________ Dr. Ariane Chebel d’Appollonia _______________________________________________ Dr. Gregg Van Ryzin _______________________________________________ Dr. David Rosen Newark, New Jersey May 2018 © 2018 Iuliia Hoban ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Child Soldiers and Military Actors: A Variation in Detention Policies across Liberal Democracies By: IULIIA HOBAN Dissertation Chair: Dr. Simon Reich The professional militaries of Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom have increasingly recognized that children can become part of opposing forces and face the operational and policy decisions regarding their detention. These Anglo-Saxon, consolidated, liberal democracies demonstrate a high level of similarity, in terms of their shared norms and values, and common security practices. Nonetheless, these three countries have developed distinct policies on the detention of child soldiers. This dissertation addressed the question: what explains the cross-national variation in the development of policies on the detention of child soldiers in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States? In order to answer this research question, I proposed a series of hypotheses to examine the role of three strategic actors in the policy process: military lawyers, government officials, and representatives from non-governmental organizations. I analyzed data that required both quantitative and qualitative methods to test these hypotheses.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 3: Freedom from Torture and Inhumane and Degrading Treatment Or Punishment
    69 Human Rights Review 2012 Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that: ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment’ Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment 70 Summary Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhumane degrading treatment or punishment Article 3 is an absolute right prohibiting torture, and inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. The state must not itself engage in torture, or in inhumane or degrading treatment. It is also obliged to prevent such treatment happening, and to carry out an investigation into allegations that it has. The state must comply with its obligations within its territory and, in exceptional circumstances, in different countries where it exercises effective jurisdiction. The prohibition on torture has been part of the British common law framework since the 18th century. Today the legal framework around torture is considerably more sophisticated. It is prohibited both by civil law and by several Acts of Parliament. The UK has also ratified several international conventions prohibiting torture and ill-treatment. This framework is supported by an institutional structure of regulators, including the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and Her Majesty’s Chief Inspectorate of Prisons for England and Wales (HMI Prisons). The key issues we address in this chapter are: People who use health and social care services may be at risk of inhumane or degrading treatment People who use health and social care services have a right to be protected from inhumane and degrading treatment and when there are allegations of mistreatment the state has an obligation to investigate.
    [Show full text]
  • Al Skeini Case
    Case No: CO/2242/2004 Neutral Citation Number: [2004] EWHC 2911 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION DIVISIONAL COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Tuesday, 14 December 2004 Before : THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD JUSTICE RIX and THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE FORBES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : THE QUEEN - on the Application of - MAZIN Claimants JUMAA GATTEH AL SKEINI and others - and - THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE Defendant -and- The Redress Trust Intervener - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited, 190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7421 4040, Fax No: 020 7831 8838 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rabinder Singh QC, Michael Fordham, Shaheed Fatima and Professor Christine Chinkin (instructed by Public Interest Lawyers) for the Claimants Professor Christopher Greenwood QC, Philip Sales and Cecilia Ivimy (instructed by The Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant Edward Fitzgerald QC, Mark Henderson and Joseph Middleton (instructed by Bhatt Murphy) for the Intervener by way of written submissions Hearing dates: 28th, 29th and 30th July and 30 November 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Judgment Summary (this note forms no part of the judgment) 1. In this judgment of the court, the Divisional Court considers the claims of six claimants, relatives respectively of Iraqi citizens who have died in provinces of Iraq where and at a time when the United Kingdom was recognised as an occupying power (viz between 1 May 2003 and 28 June 2004). The first five claimants’ relatives were shot in separate armed incidents involving British troops. The sixth claimant’s son, Mr Baha Mousa, died in a military prison in British custody.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice Must Follow As Baha Mousa Inquiry Makes Damning Findings Against UK Armed Forces
    AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT AI Index: EUR 45/016/2011 9 September 2011 United Kingdom: Justice must follow as Baha Mousa Inquiry makes damning findings against UK armed forces On 8 September 2011 the Baha Mousa Inquiry published its report into the death of Baha Mousa, a 26-year-old Iraqi national and father of two, who died on 15 September 2003 in UK custody in Basra, Iraq after being tortured over a period of 36 hours. A post-mortem examination revealed 93 separate injuries on his body. The Inquiry found the cause of Baha Mousa’s death to be the combination of two parts; the first was Baha Mousa’s vulnerability resulting from lack of food and water, heat, rhabdomyolysis, renal failure, exertion, exhaustion and multiple injuries, and the second, the violent assault and dangerous restraint technique to which he was subjected by UK armed forces personnel. The Inquiry also examined the treatment of nine other Iraqi nationals who were detained alongside Baha Mousa who were subjected to human rights violations that constituted war crimes, and concluded that all the detainees had been assaulted but that it was not possible to determine the identities of all of those soldiers responsible for the assaults. The Inquiry report lays out in detail the shocking treatment suffered by Baha Mousa and the other detained men at the hands of UK soldiers, finding that Baha Mousa died in army custody after an “appalling episode of serious gratuitous violence”, and that it was “beyond doubt that most, if not all, of the [d]etainees were the victims of serious abuse and mistreatment”.
    [Show full text]
  • The UK, Interrogation and Iraq, 2003-8 Newbery, SL
    The UK, interrogation and Iraq, 2003-8 Newbery, SL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09592318.2016.1189519 Title The UK, interrogation and Iraq, 2003-8 Authors Newbery, SL Type Article URL This version is available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/37072/ Published Date 2016 USIR is a digital collection of the research output of the University of Salford. Where copyright permits, full text material held in the repository is made freely available online and can be read, downloaded and copied for non-commercial private study or research purposes. Please check the manuscript for any further copyright restrictions. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. The UK, Interrogation and Iraq, 2003-8 Dr Samantha Newbery Intelligence relating to Iraq has been the subject of official and press scrutiny since the US and the UK began preparing for the 2003 invasion. The publication of the UK Joint Intelligence Committee’s paper on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in September 2002 was the first aspect to be given this attention.1 This interest peaked again when the UK’s Butler Inquiry into intelligence on WMD was commissioned and reported in 2004.2 In the same year the use of interrogation as a method of collecting intelligence in Iraq began to receive attention when pictures of prisoners being abused at the US military prison at Abu Ghraib were published.3 The UK’s own public record of interrogation in Iraq has also been tarnished, not least by the death of Baha Mousa, a detainee who died whilst being held for questioning at the Temporary Detention Facility in Basra in September 2003.
    [Show full text]