MI5 agents ‘tried to recruit Guantánamo detainees’

MI5 tried to recruit men held in Guantánamo Bay and other US prison camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan by offering to secure their return to the United Kingdom in exchange for information, according to a source of  The Independent.

One of the men, Richard Belmar, was told he would be paid “well” for his services if he was willing to work undercover for MI5. A second detainee, Bisher Al Rawi, was told that if he agreed to work for the security service he would be “freed within months”.

Three other detainees were threatened with rendition and harsh detention regimes if they did not co-operate with their British and American interrogators.

The source of the Independent claimed MI5 failed to honour the promises made by its agents, which were cleared by senior officers in London. The alleged clandestine recruitment operation was being pursued at the same time that the British Government was supporting American claims that those held at Guantánamo and similar facilities in Afghanistan and Pakistan represented a serious threat to world security.

PM: Iraqis need help with intelligence gathering

Iraq’s prime minister said Tuesday that Iraqi forces are ready to take over their own security as the U.S. begins to withdraw but that the government still needs help gathering intelligence to target insurgents and prevent attacks.”Realistically, the troops and weapons will not play the fundamental role,” he said. “The main thing we need is intelligence information coming through about the penetration into al-Qaida.”

Earlier this month the UN released a very criticial report of the Iraqi authorities’ practice of administrative detention and the lack of progress in the prosecution of the suspect perpetrators of the torture and murder of detainees.

New Chief Prosecutor Appointed For Military Commissions At Guantánamo

Andy Worthington has learned that the Commissions’ Chief Prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, is retiring from active duty, and will be replaced by Capt. John Murphy (US Navy Reserve). No formal turnover date has been announced, but it is expected that the transition will take place over the next two months.

UN CAT demands access to Israel’s secret detention ‘Facility 1391’

The UN Committee Against Torture in Geneva prepared a document on Israel’s record on torture on Tuesday and called on Tel Aviv to release information on the alleged “Facility 1391” which is situated in an “undetermined location within Israel and which is not accessible to the International Committee of the Red Cross or detainees’ lawyers or relatives.”

“Allegations of torture, ill-treatment and poor detention conditions in this facility have been reported to the committee,” read the document.

In a written reply, Israel denied that it was operating the facility or using it to interrogate suspects.

“For several years now, the ISA (Israel Scurity Agency) is not involved in any way in operating that facility, and no ISA interrogations are conducted there. Furthermore, since September 2006, the facility has not been used for detention,” said Israel.

It added that allegations of torture had been investigated by “competent authorities and no grounds for criminal proceedings were found,” decisions which were upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court.

The committee said it had received reports according to which “Palestinian detainees are subjected by Israeli security officials to acts in violation” of the anti-torture convention, including beatings, sleep deprivations and sharp twisting of the head.

The committee is scheduled to publish a report on Tuesday’s hearing on May 15.

In February CAT had already announced that this issue would be on the table:

7. According to information before the Committee, the Israeli Security Agency (ISA) has allegedly been operating a secret detention and interrogation facility, known as “Facility 1391” in an undetermined location within Israel, not accessible to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or detainees’ lawyers or relatives. In response to a petition filed by Hamoked to the Supreme Court to examine the facility’s legality, the Supreme Court refused interim measures to prevent holding detainees and required the State to inform it about any persons being held in the facility. The military prosecutor later informed Hamoked that there had been no investigations and in 2005, the Court found that the authorities had acted reasonably in not conducting the investigations. Please clarify how a decision not to investigate can be justified and how this conforms to article 12 of the Convention. Allegations of torture, ill-treatment and poor detention conditions in this facility have been reported to the Committee. What measures have been undertaken to ensure appropriate access by ICRC to all detainees in this facility.

8. The State party report refers to the High Court of Justice decision, The Centre for Defense of the Individual v the Attorney General (decision of 14 June 2005), where the Court rejected two petitions requesting an additional investigation of alleged torture in the facility 1391. Please indicate what other cases, if any, have been brought to justice for acts of torture and ill-treatment at this facility and the results of these investigations and proceedings.

Several NGO reports to CAT mention the facility as well:

The United Against Torture Coaliton (consisting of 14 Palestinian and Israeli NGO’s) submitted this report in September 2008):

11.3 The Israeli army, in conjunction with the ISA, have been operating a detention and interrogation facility, known as “Facility 1391” for decades in an unknown location inside Israel. Detainees are not told where they are being held. Legal counsel for specific clients may, upon request, learn of their client’s detention at the facility, but remain in the dark about its location.

11.4 Interrogations at this facility are alleged to employ extreme measures amounting to torture and ill-treatment. The conditions of detention are reported by former detainees of the facility to include sensory deprivation, including frequent and long periods of isolation and the denial of basic sanitary conditions.95 The International Committee of the Red Cross has no access to this facility.

11.5 The Israeli human rights organisation, HaMoked – Center for the Defence of the Individual, revealed the existence of this Facility in 2002 as a result of two habeas corpus petitions filled with the Israeli Supreme Court on behalf of missing residents of the OPT whom the Israeli Prison Service, the police and the army were unable to trace. The State claimed the location of “Facility 1391” was classified not for the purpose of violating detainees’ rights but for security reasons.96 Moreover, the State claimed that the fact that its location is classified does not impair the rights of the detainees held in the facility.97

11.6 HaMoked’s 2003 petition asking the Israeli Supreme Court to examine the legality of the facility is still pending. The Court issued an Order Nisi regarding the secrecy of the location of the facility, but rejected HaMoked’s request for interim measures against the holding of detainees at the facility. The Court requested that the State inform it about any person held in the facility so that it can address the situation of these persons on a case by case basis.

11.7 In 2003, HaMoked requested an investigation by the Military Advocate General (MAG) and the ISA (formerly GSS) Ombudsman in charge of Detainees’ Complaints (via theState Attorney’s Office) into complaints by ten detainees concerning their physical conditions of detention and the means of interrogation. This was in response to the Israeli Supreme Court’s directive that normal complaints procedures should first be exhausted. The Chief Military Prosecutor informed HaMoked one year after complaints were filed that the military had not investigated the complaints and had no intention to do so.98 In 2005, the Court rejected HaMoked’s petition on behalf of two former detainees whose cases had been raised with the MAG. The rejected these petitions, finding that the authorities had acted reasonably in not conducting investigations.99

Detailed cases to back up these allegations can be found in an annex to their report here (pages 40-49).

G.A. – Detained Facility 1391 and temporary locations including Jalameh Prison; informed he was detained “on the Moon”; position abuse; threats against son; beaten with club;sleep depravation; and no ICRC visit at 1391

M.J. – Detained Facility 1391 and temporary locations including King Hussein Bridge (border between Jordan and West Bank) and Jalameh Prison; informed “we are moving you to a facility on the Moon”; position abuse; beating; denial of toilet facilities; solitary confinement; no contact with family for two months; no ICRC visits; family members arrested to exert pressure; denied access to lawyer; and not informed of decisions to extend detention

S.A. – Detained Facility 1391 and temporary locations including Nafta Prison, Huwarra Interrogation and Detention Centre and Jalameh Prison; informed by soldiers that “it was forbidden to say [where I was being taken], and they didn’t even know where they were taking me”; humiliating treatment; position abuse; beating generally, including on genitals after being informed of prior operation; denied access to lawyer; ICRC specifically denied access to Facility 1391; solitary confinement; and repeatedly told “nobody knows where you are.”

More on Facility 1391 here and here.

Council of Europe questions Britain’s commitment to fighting cybercrime and terrorism

Terry Davis, the secretary general of the Council of Europe expressed bafflement at Britain’s failure to ratify three major conventions on cross-border crime, including one designed to combat the financing of terrorism.The convention on cybercrime was drawn up in November 2001 while the two other conventions, on the prevention of terrorism and on money-laundering, including the cross-border financing of terrorism, were introduced in May 2005.

UK publishes list of people banned from country for ‘fostering extremism’, US pulls back ‘extremism dictionary’

While the UK Home Office on Tuesday published a list of individuals who are prohibited from entering the country “for fostering extremism or hatred between October 2008 and March 2009,” the US Homeland Security Department has pulled back its ‘extremism dictionary.

The list UK names 16 individuals, including religious preachers, white supremacists, gang leaders, and controversial US radio host Michael Savage. Six additional individuals whose names were not disclosed have also been banned.

The 11 page “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” that came out of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) in late March lists definitions for key terms and phrases used by Homeland Security analysts “that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States,” the report said. The report defines issues such as ‘black separatism’, ‘antiabortion extremism’, ‘left wing extremist’, ‘environmental extremism’, ‘Mexican separatism’ and the ‘tax resistance’ movement.

UK Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said:

Coming to the UK is a privilege and I refuse to extend that privilege to individuals who abuse our standards and values to undermine our way of life. Therefore, I will not hesitate to name and shame those who foster extremist views as I want them to know that they are not welcome here.

The government opposes extremism in all its forms and I am determined to stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country. This is the driving force behind tighter rules on exclusions for unacceptable behaviour.

Smith also announced Tuesday that as of June 1, the UK government will be able to ban European nationals and their families where the home secretary decides that the individual poses a threat to national security or public safety.

Geert Wilders apparently is not on the list, although the Home Office earlier has said that his presence at Parliament would pose a “serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society,” arguing that his statements on Islam “would threaten community harmony and therefore public security in the U.K.”

The UK Home Office has had the power to ban people from entering the country since 2005. Between August 2005 and March 2009, 101 individuals have been excluded. In October, Smith proposed stricter rules for determining who could enter the UK, including a presumption in favor of exclusion.

India: Special Courts to Try Riot Cases

Five special fast-track courts, whose establishment was ordered by India’s Supreme Court on May 1, 2009, will be set up to try cases resulting from riots in the Indian state of Gujarat in 2002. The events had resulted in numerous deaths – estimates range from 1,000 to 2,500 people, most of them Muslims – following a train fire in which 60 Hindus perished.

John Sifton: Investigation should go beyond torture, also cover homicides

For five years as a researcher for Human Rights Watch and reporter, John Sifton has investigated homicides resulting from the Bush administration’s torture policy. In a new piece at the Daily Beast he argues that Attorney General Eric Holder must now decide whether to investigate and prosecute homicides, not just cases of torture. Earlier Sifton findings included:

• An estimated 100 detainees have died during interrogations, some proven to be tortured to death.

• The Bush Justice Department refused to investigate and prosecute alleged murders even when the CIA inspector general referred a case.

• Sifton’s request for specific information on cases was rebuffed by the Bush Justice Department, though it was “familiar with the cases.”

Muslims rethink close ties to law enforcement

Georgetown SLB reports that grass-roots relationships between Muslims and the federal government are in jeopardy.A coalition of Muslim groups is calling for Muslims to stop cooperating with the FBI – not on national security or safety issues but on community outreach.  The coalition is upset over what it says is increasing government surveillance in mosques, new Justice Department guidelines that the groups say encourage profiling, and the FBI’s recent suspension of ties with the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Council of Europe: Parliamentary Assembly to address abuse of state secrecy

On 6 May, Swiss Senator Dick Marty and other MPs presented a resolution to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on abuse of state secrecy for reasons of national security. The draft resolution denounces the abuse of state secrecy claims to prevent accountability for serious human rights violations committed in pursing counterterrorism objectives, including in Italy, the USA and the UK. The resolution asserts that in these situations state secrecy cannot be invoked to prevent investigations and prosecutions of those responsible.