Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

War on Iraq

U.K.'s Top Lawyer Accused of Telling Brit Commanders Not to Protect Iraqis' Human Rights

By Robert Verkaik, Independent UK. Posted May 30, 2007.


In a scandal that is rocking the U.K., Lord Goldsmith is accused of telling the Army that its soldiers were not bound by the Human Rights Act when arresting, detaining and interrogating Iraqi prisoners.
Advertisement

Editor's note: This story is shaping up to be a significant scandal in the United Kingdom. It should be noted that Lord Goldsmith has vigorously denied the charges contained in this article.

The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, is facing accusations that he told the Army its soldiers were not bound by the Human Rights Act when arresting, detaining and interrogating Iraqi prisoners.

Previously confidential emails, seen by the Independent, between London and British military headquarters in Iraq soon after the start of the war, suggest Lord Goldsmith's advice was to adopt a "pragmatic" approach when handling prisoners, saying it was not necessary to follow the "higher standards" of the protection of the Human Rights Act.

That, according to human rights lawyers, was tantamount to the attorney general advising the military to ignore the Human Rights Act and to simply observe the Geneva Conventions. It was also contrary to advice given by the Army's senior lawyer in Iraq, who urged the adoption of higher standards.

Today, rights groups and experts in international law will call on the government to disclose Lord Goldsmith's legal opinion, which they say could have helped create a culture of abuse of Iraqis by British soldiers.

Last month, the first British soldier convicted of a war crime was jailed for a year and dismissed from the Army after being convicted of mistreating Iraqi civilians, including the hotel worker Baha Mousa, who died of injuries at the hands of British soldiers. In 2005, three British soldiers were jailed by a court martial in Germany after "trophy" photographs emerged, showing Iraqi detainees being abused at an aid center called Camp Bread Basket. There are about 60 more allegations of abuse being prepared for legal claims by rights groups.

Last week, Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights wrote to the government to ask for an "explanation" about the evidence of torture in the Baha Mousa court martial.

Andrew Dismore MP, chair of the committee, said: "We have asked the Ministry of Defense to explain what appear to be stark inconsistencies in the evidence presented to our committee about the use of inhuman and degrading interrogation techniques prohibited as long ago as 1972."

But emails sent just after the invasion indicate Lord Goldsmith's belief that British soldiers in Iraq were not bound by the Human Rights Act. The documents also show a wide differing of opinion between him and Lt. Col. Nicholas Mercer, the Army's most senior legal adviser on the ground, who wrote to say he felt "the ECHR would apply" to troops in Iraq.

On one occasion, Rachel Quick, the legal adviser to Permanent Joint Headquarters who had regularly sought and been given guidance from Lord Goldsmith on the treatment of Iraqi prisoners, wrote to Col. Mercer giving her interpretation of the attorney general's advice. His view, she said, "was that the HRA was only intended to protect rights conferred by the convention and must look to international law to determine the scope of those rights."

Quick went on say that the advice of the attorney general, supported by professor Christopher Greenwood (the barrister who advised Lord Goldsmith on the legality of the war), was that, in the circumstances, the HRA did not apply. "For your purposes," she wrote, "I would suggest this means no requirement for you to provide guidance on the application of the HRA. I hope this is clear."

Quick, who in November 2003, was appointed OBE, added: "With regard to the detention of civilians, I will look at your documents in more detail and discuss with FCO, MoD legal advisers. Although my initial thoughts are you are trying to introduce U.K. procedures to a Geneva Convention IV context. Whilst this may be the perfect solution it may not be the pragmatic solution. Again we raised this issue with the AG and got a helpful steer on the procedures. I'll aim to try to produce guidance, taking into account their advice on the detention of civilians."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, human rights, goldsmith

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Maybe England knows how to fight a war.
Posted by: White middleclass male on May 30, 2007 3:39 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unlike fat, lazy Americans who rattle their sabers but then want to see pictures of me handing out food, clothing or medical supplies to Mohammad the muslim.

Anyone ever see the movie “Control Room” about Al Jezera reporting on the Iraq war? The main character said something to the effect of: “America thinks they can bully the world and I agree they can. Americans believes they can go around and invade countries and they can. But America believes the people will welcome them and wave flags and that just wont happen.”

Later in the movie he also said he was going to pay for his children to go to college in the States and he wanted them to stay there when they are finished. That has little to do with my point but I just thought I would put it in anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Western Hypocrisy, Double standards, class standards for War criminals
Posted by: Universal on May 30, 2007 4:08 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I absolutely loath the Corporate media, and in particular, the corporate, nationalist, and pro zionist ideology of NPR radio. The whiff of rotten standards, double standards, class standards, by class liberals and zionist expert idiots, comes through especially on the issue of Human rights, and who is designated as a Criminal rogue state, war criminal, and Human rights violaters. Some Human rights groups have been condemned and criticised for even their double standards, as it relates to the issue of Palestinians and Lebanese civilians and Israel. Too often the hidden agenda of national bias by some Jews, sympathetic to Israel or Amerikan Empire creeps into their hypocritical reports, when it comes to applying a universal standard.


NPR Radio correctly condemns the violations, in places like Darfur, Somalia, or the demand to try African dictators for their brutality. The 200,000 deaths in Somalia is called a "genocide", and it is, but the 650,000 deaths in Iraq, and probably closer to a million by now, is not acknowledged, and worse never called a war crime. Both Goldsmith and Gonzales, along with their corporate ideological class whores, class liberals on NPR, or class conservatives, on Corporate Media, routinely display this class rot of double standards, class standards.

The irritating thing about NPR Radio, is that they call themselves public radio, but they are in fact propagandists, for Amerikan Empire and Zionist thugs. Their class elites and their class ideology, promote these double standards routinely and will not allow the real left to take them down for their rotten hypocrisy. Many writers have commented on the racism, double standards to go only after third world dictators, which we typically finance, or support covertly over the wishes of its people, such as the Columbian death squads, or like we did with Saddam, who we supported, but then claimed: "at least we got rid of a dictator". This class liberalism, and zionist rot too, especially as it relates to the racist double standards, and Zionist standards when it comes to the Middle East must stop.

Lord Goldsmith, Gonzales, are not alone. Their class standards, extends to the rot of all Democrats, complicit war criminals, who cheered on Israel's attacks against Lebanese fleeing, yet no war crimes have been leveled. Where are these whores when it comes to demanding that criminals in the Bush administration, and both class parties, be tried for the war crimes in Iraq. These Human Rights Groups condemn....but they do not go after the thugs and Nazis, fascists, and Zionists who carry out imperial policies. Goldsmith and Gonzales and the Corporate media, along with so called public news, will continue their double standards, so long as their ideological rot, double standards are not called on, and prosecuted.

It is illegal to threaten Iran or another country with aggression, but NPR routinely trots outs its lying officials, expert idiots, Zionist shits, Amerikan Enterprise warmongerers, while claiming to be different from the Corporate class ideologists. The day you hear Western Journalism condemn Goldsmith, Gonzales for their double standards, as well as their own class standards, will be the day that Corporate Ideology has been dismantled, like Chavez has done in Venezuala, by going after Criminal Corporate media which propagandized for his murder and overthrow. We need Democracy on our airwaves. We need to focus on the judicial nazis, who use class laws to justify fascism, and zionism, class nationalism and expose these legal processes as a sham.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Caesar77
Posted by: Caesar77 on May 30, 2007 5:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The British have been abusing human rights in the North of Ireland ever since that state was artificially created. Remember 'Bloody Sunday.' ? The British Army shoot 14 innocent people dead during a Civil Rights march. circa;1972.
They are no different in Iraq and they don't need instructions from Goldsmith or anyone else, for that matter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just another reason why the UK should pull out of Europe.
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on May 30, 2007 9:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the meddling and laws forced by the bureaucrats in Brussels, Strasbourg, and Luxemburg are now even interfering in war fighting. At first the rules were, relatively, benign: bananas must only be curved a certain way, no use of traditional measures (pounds, ounces, gills, gallons, etc), no spanking your child, don't work many hours, etc. Now we have to treat enemies better than common criminals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]