U.Ok. Spies Said to Be Complicit in U.S. Torture of Terrorism Suspects

LONDON — Britain’s intelligence companies tolerated and abetted “inexcusable” abuse of terrorism suspects by their American counterparts, in accordance with a report launched by Parliament on Thursday that provides a wide-ranging official condemnation of British conduct within the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, assaults.

Many instances described by Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee concerned British brokers feeding info to allies, primarily Americans, for the interrogation of detainees who they knew or suspected had been being abused, or receiving intelligence from such interrogations, with out elevating objections.

The committee documented dozens of instances by which Britain despatched suspects to different international locations that had been identified to make use of torture or aided others in doing so — a observe often called rendition. But it mentioned that in 4 years of investigation, reviewing some 40,000 paperwork, it discovered just a few situations of British brokers immediately collaborating in abuse.

The report additionally says that appreciable proof makes it “difficult to comprehend” how high officers in London “did not recognize in this period the pattern of mistreatment by the U.S.” — abuses that the Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has documented in grisly detail.

The committee wrote that it didn’t discover proof that British intelligence companies willfully missed American abuses as a matter of coverage. Rather, it concluded, the British “were the junior partner with limited access or influence, and distinctly uncomfortable at the prospect of complaining to their host.”

The abuses occurred primarily from 2002 to 2004, the report says, after which pointers for British conduct had been strengthened, although not all the time adopted.

The report uncovered a rift between Prime Minister Theresa May and the committee, led by Dominic Grieve, a lawmaker from Mrs. May’s Conservative Party who can be a former legal professional normal.

It mentioned that Mrs. May had prevented the panel from questioning brokers who had been low-ranking on the time — in different phrases, most of these working within the discipline — and from asking any officers about specifics of the operations they labored on.

The committee mentioned that it had requested Mrs. May to rethink her orders in early 2017, however that, greater than a yr later, “no response has been received.”

“We were adamant that we must hear from officers who were involved at the time,” the committee wrote, “as this was essential if the inquiry was to be thorough and comprehensive and be in a position to reach properly considered, balanced and fair views about the facts.”

Source link

allofit Author

Leave a Reply