Britain: Security Service “facilitated” torture of Guantánamo detainee英国：保安服务的“便利”酷刑关塔那摩被拘留者
By通过 Richard Tyler理查德泰勒 | A London court has ruled that the British government must disclose information that could support the claim that torture was used to extract confessions from Binyam Mohamed, a former British resident who has been held in Guantánamo Bay since September 2004. |伦敦一家法院裁定，英国政府必须披露的信息可以支持的说法，酷刑被用来逼供从binyam穆罕默德，前英国驻地谁一直被关押在关塔那摩湾自2004年9月。
The ruling by the Judicial Review—a special court that considers the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body—is a rebuff to Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who had initially argued that he was under no obligation to provide Mohamed’s lawyers with the information.裁决的司法复核-一个特别法庭，考虑到合法性的决定或行动所作出的一个公共机构， -是一个试图修补已经千疮百孔的外交大臣大卫米利班，谁最初曾辩称，他没有义务提供穆罕默德的律师与信息。
Binyam Mohamed has now been incarcerated for nearly six and half years. binyam穆罕默德现在已被关押近6年半。 He was first detained in Pakistan, and then subjected to “extraordinary rendition”—Washington’s euphemism for its programme of organised kidnapping and torture—to Morocco.他是第一次被拘留在巴基斯坦，然后受到“不平凡的移交逃犯” -华盛顿奇摩的委婉说法，其方案举办的绑架和酷刑-摩洛哥。 Here he was held for 18 months while his captors used torture—including slicing his genitals with a razor—to wring a “confession” out of him.在这里他被关押18个月，而他的绑架者使用酷刑，包括切片他的生殖器与微弱，以扭一个“交代”了他。
He currently faces trial by a US Military Tribunal, charged with conspiring to commit terrorism and providing material support for terrorism in an alleged “dirty-bomb” plot.他目前面临的审判，美国军事法庭，被控以共谋犯下恐怖主义和提供物质支持恐怖主义，在被指控的“肮脏炸弹”图谋的。 He could face the death penalty if found guilty.他可能面临死刑如果罪名成立。 The judges ruled that the information is “not only necessary but essential for his defence”.法官裁定的资料是“不仅是必要的，但必需为其辩护” 。
Human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, Director of Reprieve, who has represented Mohamed since 2005, told the press, “This is a momentous decision.人权律师克莱夫斯塔福德史密斯，主任缓刑，谁代表穆罕默德自2005年以来，新闻界说， “这是一个重大的决定。 Compelling the British government to release information that can prove Mr. Mohamed’s innocence is one obvious step towards making up for the years of torture that he has suffered.迫使英国政府公布的资料可以证明穆罕默德先生的清白，是一个明显的一步，弥补了多年的酷刑，他便陷入困境。 The next step is for the British government to demand an end to the charade against him in Guantánamo Bay, and return him home to Britain.”下一步是英国政府的需求，结束了文字对他在关塔那摩湾，并返回他的家乡英国“ 。
In their ruling, the judges state, “It is a long standing principle of the common law that confessions obtained by torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment cannot be used as evidence in any trial.”在其裁决中，法官的国家“ ，这是一个长期的原则，共同的法律的供述得到了酷刑或其他残忍，不人道或有辱人格待遇不能被用来作为证据在任何审判” 。
The Judicial Review was held at the end of July over five days in both open and closed sessions, also hearing testimony in camera from British Security Service and Secret Service officers who had been involved in the questioning of Mohamed while he was detained in Pakistan and elsewhere.司法复核举行截至七月底，超过五天，在公开和非公开会议，也听证会的证词在相机从英国保安服务公司和服务人员的秘密谁曾参与在讯问穆罕默德，而他被关押在巴基斯坦和其他地方的。 The court’s 75-page open judgement was finally published last week, while a secret “closed” judgement has also been made.法院的75页的公开判决，终于上周公布的，而一个秘密“封闭”的判断，也已经取得。
Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones found there were compelling grounds that the “exculpatory” information should be released in confidence to Mohamed’s legal representatives.勋爵司法托马斯和沈澄劳埃德琼斯发现有令人信服的理由是“无罪”的资料，应予以释放的信心，在穆罕默德的法律代表。 No order for the provision of such information has been made until a further hearing considers the issues of “national security” raised by the Foreign Secretary as grounds for its non-disclosure.没有秩序，为提供这类资料已取得，直到进一步听证会认为，问题的“国家安全”所提出的外相为理由而不予披露。
At the Judicial Review, Dinah Rose QC, representing Mohamed, told the court that by cooperating with the US in its unlawful treatment of her client, the security and intelligence agencies were “mixed up in wrongdoing”.在司法审查，黛娜上升御用大律师，代表穆罕默德，告诉法庭，由与美国合作在其非法治疗她的客户，安全和情报机构是“混合起来，在不法行为” 。 It was also alleged that the US “provided the UK with the fruits of his interrogation”.也有人指称，美国“提供的英国与成果，他的审讯” 。
Rose said that a British agent—identified only as “Witness B”—had made a “veiled threat” to Mohamed while he was being held in Pakistan, to encourage his “cooperation”, with the implication that “we won’t help you unless you confess”.玫瑰说，英国的代理人确定的只是作为“证人B ”的-提出了“含蓄的威胁” ，穆罕默德，而他被关押在巴基斯坦，鼓励他“合作” ，暗示“我们不会帮助你除非你坦白“ 。 She also asserted that MI5 had “repeatedly” provided the US authorities with detailed information about Mohamed’s life in the UK, information that was then used by his captors during interrogation.她还声称，军情五处曾“多次”为美国提供了与当局的详细资料，穆罕默德的生命在英国，资料，当时所使用的绑架者在审问期间。
In his summing up, Ben Jaffey, another of Mohamed’s legal team, highlighted the contradictions in MI5’s accounts; one MI5 officer had said that British security and intelligence agencies “did not know” Binyam Mohamed’s whereabouts after he was flown out of Pakistan in 2002, whereas an MI5 representative had explicitly told the House of Commons Intelligence and Security Committee that it believed he was in US custody.在他的总结，本jaffey ，另一穆罕默德的律师团，突出的矛盾，在军情五处的帐目;之一的MI5人员说，英国安全和情报机构“不知道” ， binyam穆罕默德的行踪后，他被送至走出巴基斯坦在2002年，而一的MI5代表明确告诉众议院的商品，情报和安全委员会，它相信他是在被美方关押。
Seeking to justify its refusal to hand over information that could uphold Mohamed’s claim that he was tortured, the government told the court that the UK was “hugely dependent in a number of areas on US intelligence”.寻求证明其拒绝交出资料，可以坚持穆罕默德声称他的折磨，政府告诉法庭，英国是“巨大的依赖，在一些领域对美国的情报” 。
Moreover, it was a “fundamental principle” that information passed between the countries not be disclosed to a third party without the consent of the country which had provided it.此外，这是一项“基本原则”的资料，通过国家之间不会向第三者披露，未经同意，该国已提供。 “Any disclosure, however limited, would seriously undermine this principle to the point that future cooperation between the UK and its most valuable intelligence partner, the US, would be severely jeopardised”, posing a “very serious risk to UK national security”. “任何披露，然而有限，将严重破坏这一原则指出，未来之间的合作，英国和其最宝贵的情报合作伙伴，美国，将会受到严重损害” ，是一个“非常严重的风险，英国国家安全” 。
Judicial Review findings 司法审查的结果
Binyam Mohamed’s case makes a mockery of the Labour government’s pretensions to oppose the use of torture and uphold human rights. binyam穆罕默德的情况下作出的嘲弄工党政府的伪装，反对使用酷刑和维护人权。
While claiming to uphold the Geneva Conventions and international treaties outlawing the use of torture, British military personnel, as well as officers from the various intelligence agencies have been implicated in the mistreatment of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq.而声称要坚持日内瓦公约和国际条约禁止使用酷刑，英国军事人员，以及人员从各情报机构已经有牵连的虐待被关押在阿富汗和伊拉克。 In the case of Binyam Mohamed, they have been caught red-handed.在该案件binyam穆罕默德，他们已被当场抓获的霸道。
The judgement records that “it was accepted on behalf of the Foreign Secretary… that BM [Binyam Mohamed] had established an arguable case (i) that over the period April 2002 to May 2004 he was first held by the United States incommunicado and without access to a lawyer or a court or tribunal in Pakistan, and then detained there or elsewhere by the United States until his arrival in Guantánamo Bay in September 2004 (ii) that he was subject to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by or on behalf of the United States during such detention and (iii) that he was subject to torture during such detention by or on behalf of the United States.”判决记录： “这是接受就代表外相…说的BM [ binyam穆罕默德]成立了一个值得商榷的情况（一） ，超过期限2002年4月至2004年5月，他首次举办，由美国单独和没有访问一名律师或法院或仲裁庭在巴基斯坦，然后被拘留的有或其他地方的由美国，直到他在抵达关塔那摩湾在2004年9月（二） ，他是受到残忍，不人道和有辱人格的待遇或由他人代的美国在这些拘留及（ iii ）说，他受到酷刑，其间如拘留或由他人代美国“ 。
Moreover, the legal hearing and court ruling establish conclusively that not only did the British government know about the mistreatment of Mohamed, British agents also facilitated this “wrongdoing”.此外，法律听证会和法庭的裁决，建立得出结论认为，不仅英国政府知道虐待穆罕默德，英国特工也促进了这一“不法行为” 。 The judges found that “The relationship between the United Kingdom Government and the United States authorities was far beyond that of a bystander or witness to the alleged wrongdoing”.法官发现“之间的关系，联合王国政府和美国当局是远远超出了这一个旁观者或证人所指称不法行为” 。
Even more damning, the court found “that on the basis that what was done was arguably wrongdoing, the SyS [Security Service] facilitated it in the manner and to the extent described.”更严厉，法院认定“ ，在此基础上认为，是什么做的是说不法行为，系统[安全服务] ，它在便利的方式和程度所描述的” 。
The court concluded that the “conduct of the Security Service facilitated interviews by or on behalf of the United States when BM was being detained by the United States incommunicado and without access to a lawyer in Pakistan in the period April 2002 until at least May 2002… The Court also concluded that the Security Service continued to facilitate the interviewing of BM by providing information and questions after 17 May 2002, in the knowledge of what was reported to them as to the circumstances of his detention and treatment in Pakistan.”法院的结论是， “进行的安全服务，促进采访或由他人代美国时的BM被禁锢由美国单独接触律师在巴基斯坦，在2002年4月期间，至少要等到2002年5月…法院还得出结论认为，保安服务，以方便继续约谈的BM提供资料和提出的问题后， 2002年5月17日，在以知识什么样的报道，给他们以的情况下对他的拘留和待遇在巴基斯坦“ 。
The Security Services then continued to provide further information and questions to their American counterparts, even when they knew that Mohamed had been moved from Afghanistan to a third country, where he faced serious mistreatment.保安服务，然后继续提供进一步的信息和问题，以他们的美国同行，甚至当他们知道穆罕默德已提出的从阿富汗到第三国，在那里他遇到了严重的虐待。
Mohamed’s lawyers have been pressing the government to release information and documents they held that might sustain his claim that the “evidence” against him had been extracted under torture.穆罕默德的律师已敦促政府发布的资料和文件，他们认为，可能维持他声称“证据”对他已提取的酷刑下。 After an initial request for information was lodged by his legal representatives in April, government lawyers responded by saying the “UK is under no obligation under international law to assist foreign courts and tribunals in assuring that torture evidence is not admitted”.经过初步的资料的要求提出了由他的法律代表在4月，政府律师回应说， “英国是没有根据国际法规定的义务，以协助外国法院和法庭在确保酷刑的证据是不承认” 。
Binyam Mohamed’s case was finally accepted for Judicial Review at the beginning of June. binyam穆罕默德的情况下，终于接受司法审查，在六月初。 Recognising the urgency of his plight, Mr Justice Saunders agreed to an “expedited” hearing, saying, “If it is correct that in the course of an interrogation, in which material supplied by the Defendant [the British government] was employed, the Claimant [Binyam Mohamed] was tortured, then it is arguable that there is an obligation to disclose material which may assist Claimant in establishing before the American Military Court that he was tortured.认识的迫切性，他的困境，法官桑德斯商定了一项“快速”听证会，说： “如果这是正确的，在过程中讯问，在这种材料的供应由被告[英国政府]聘，索赔人[ binyam穆罕默德]的折磨，那是有商榷的余地是有披露义务的物质，可协助索赔人在建立之前，美国军事法院，他的折磨。 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion not to order disclosure can only be determined at a full hearing.”法院是否应行使其酌情权不命令披露，只能确定在正式聆讯“ 。
It was not until this application for a Judicial Review was accepted that the Foreign Secretary then grudgingly acknowledged government documents “could be considered exculpatory or might otherwise be relevant in the context of proceedings before the Military Commissions”.但直到这个申请司法复核接纳外相，然后勉强承认政府文件“可被视为无罪的，或者可能，否则有关的语境中的程序之前，军事委员会” 。
Geneva Conventions 日内瓦公约
In its deliberations, the court considered whether the British government or its agents had contravened the Genva Conventions.在审议过程中，法院认为，英国政府是否或其代理人违反了杰尼瓦公约。
“The United Kingdom Armed Forces are trained in the laws of armed conflict set out in the Geneva Conventions. “联合王国武装部队都是训练有素的武装冲突法的内容已载列于日内瓦公约。 The Joint Services Intelligence Organisations’ training documentation states that the following techniques are expressly and explicitly forbidden: (a) physical punishment of any sort; (b) the use of stress positions; (c) intentional sleep deprivations; (d) withdrawal of food, water or medical treatment and three other specified techniques.”联合服务，情报机构的培训，文件指出，下列技术是明文规定，并明确禁止： （一）体罚任何种类的; （二）使用应力的立场; （三）故意剥夺睡眠; （四）撤回食物，水或医疗待遇和其他三个指定的技术“ 。
Citing a 2007 report by the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), established by the Intelligence Services Act 1994 to examine the policy, administration and expenditure of the Security Service (SyS), Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the court found that the SyS and SIS “must have appreciated that it [rendition] was contrary to the rule of law.”援引2007年的报告，情报和安全委员会（的ISC ） ，成立了由情报服务法1994年，研究政策，行政和支出的保安服务（系统） ，秘密情报服务（ SIS ）的，和政府通信总部（ gchq ） ，法院认定该系统与SIS的“必须明白， [移交逃犯]是违反法治” 。
The ruling also documents the fact that the government knew of the ongoing and persistent mistreatment of detainees being held by the American authorities, or those acting on their behalf.执政党也文件的事实，即政府知道正在进行的和持久性虐待被拘留者正在举行的美国当局，或在那些代理代表他们。
From December 2001, British intelligence operatives were able to interview detainees in Afghanistan, if permission was given by the US authorities holding them.从2001年12月，英国的情报操作工能够采访时被拘留在阿富汗，如果许可是由美国当局举行。 The first SyS officers arrived at Bagram airbase on January 9, 2002 to begin this interrogation.首次系统人员抵达巴格拉姆空军基地对2002年1月9日开始，这审问。
A report from one such officer dated January 10, 2002 contained certain “observations” about the conditions under which the detainees were being held.一份报告，从1月等人员2002年1月10日所载的某些“意见”关于在何种情况下被拘留者被关押。 As a consequence, on January 11, 2002, instructions were sent to all SIS and SyS officers in Afghanistan that all prisoners, “however they are described, are entitled to the same levels of protection.”作为一个后果，对2002年1月11日，指示，发送给所有的SIS和系统的人员在阿富汗的所有囚犯， “不过，他们所描述的，均有权享有相同级别的保护” 。
Despite claims that this merely represented an “isolated case”, the judgement records that there were reports of a “further isolated case” in March 2002, and in April 2002 an SIS officer was present at an interrogation of a detainee by the US military, who complained of being kept “in isolation”.尽管有人声称，这只是代表一个“孤立的事件” ，判决记录，有报道说“进一步孤立的事件”在2002年3月，并于2002年4月1矽统科技人员出席了讯问一名被拘留由驻伊美军谁抱怨正在不断“孤立地” 。
In June 2002, according to an ISC report cited by the court, the SyS had discussed with Foreign and Commonwealth officials a US report that referred to the “hooding, withholding of blankets and sleep deprivation of a detainee in Afghanistan”.在2002年6月，根据一项国际科学委员会的报告所列举的法院，系统讨论了与英国外交及联邦官员报告说，美国所指的“戴头罩，扣压毛毯和睡眠剥夺一名被拘留在阿富汗” 。
Again, in July 2002, a SyS officer reported to his senior management that whilst in Afghanistan, “a United States official had referred to ‘getting a detainee ready’, which appeared to involve sleep deprivation, hooding and the use of stress positions.”再次，在2002年7月，一个系统的人员据报他的高级管理人员表示，虽然在阿富汗， “美国官员曾提到'越来越被拘留者准备' ，似乎是涉及剥夺睡眠，戴头罩和使用应力的立场” 。
The court ruling cited an official document that was sent to all Security Service and Secret Service officers in Afghanistan in January 2002: “With regard to the status of the prisoners, under the various Geneva Conventions and protocols, all prisoners, however they are described, are entitled to the same levels of protection.法院的裁决举了一个正式文件，这是发送给所有的安全服务和秘密的服务人员在阿富汗在2002年1月： “随着地位方面的囚犯，根据各项日内瓦公约和议定书的规定，所有囚犯，但他们所描述的，是享有同样程度的保护。 You have commented on their treatment.您有评论对他们的待遇。 It appears from your description that they may not be being treated in accordance with the appropriate standards.看来，从您的描述，他们未必接受治疗，在按照适当的标准。 Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this.因为他们不属于我们的保管或控制，法律并不要求你进行干预，以防止这种情况出现。 That said, HMG’s [Her Majesty’s Government] stated commitment to human rights makes it important that the Americans understand that we cannot be party to such ill treatment nor can we be seen to condone it.”尽管如此，英国政府的[女皇陛下的政府]声明，对人权的承诺，使得重要的是，美国人明白，我们不能以党的这种虐待的待遇，我们也不能让人容忍它“ 。
Such is the Labour government’s venal double-talk: not only has the British government tacitly accepted the use of torture by the US authorities from the beginning of the illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (and benefited from the “intelligence” it produces), British agents have actively facilitated it.这是工党政府的venal双谈：不仅英国政府默许接受了使用酷刑，美国当局从一开始就对非法阿富汗战争和伊拉克战争（并从中受益“情报”所产生的） ，英国代理商积极推动它。 All that counts is that HMG must not be “seen” to condone it!所有的罪状是，英国政府绝不能“看到”宽恕！
Have Your Say: Britain: Security Service “facilitated” torture of Guantánamo detainee 你说：英国：保安服务的“便利”酷刑关塔那摩被拘留者
Please read our请阅读我们的 posting guidelines before posting发布指引，然后再发布 . 。
Alternatively或者 you can discuss this report here您可以讨论此报告在这里 . 。
This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 27th, 2008 at 5:54 pm and is filed under 此项目被张贴在周三， 2008年8月27日在下午5时54分，并提交下 War & Terrorism News 战争和恐怖主义新闻 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反应，此项目通过 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 喂养。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回应 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 从你自己的网站。
Translations 翻译
Related News 相关新闻
- Security services colluded in unlawful detention保安服务勾结，在非法拘留
- UK court rules against gov’t in key Guantanamo case英国法院规则对官立在关键关塔那摩案件
- US torture claims are unreliable: British lawmakers美国酷刑的说法不可靠：英国国会议员
- Lawyer asks Taoiseach for information on CIA flights律师要求taoiseach提供资料，美国中央情报局的航班
- UK Gitmo detainee near suicide after years of torture英国关塔那摩被拘留者近自杀经过多年的酷刑
Email This Page To A Friend 电子邮件此页给朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新闻标题
- More People are Catching on to Corporate Media Lies更多的人正在赶上对企业媒体谎言
- Bisphenol A Chemical in Plastic Bottles Harms Children, Feds Conclude双酚A的化学品塑料瓶的危害，儿童，联邦调查局结束
- Class War Bonfire Night 2008阶级战争的篝火夜2008
- US out of Iraq by … “2011″美国出于对伊拉克的… … “ 2011年”
- ‘MI6 & Weapons of Mass Destruction’ '军情6处与大规模杀伤性武器'
- RIPA Surveillance Law Misused On Merseyside ripa监察法的误用，就merseyside
- Britain: Security Service “facilitated” torture of Guantánamo detainee英国：保安服务的“便利”酷刑关塔那摩被拘留者
- Blackwater-linked firm to train Canadian troops黑水联系的公司，火车加拿大部队
- Pledge: Refuse To Comply With ID Scheme服务承诺：拒绝遵守编号计划
- Why can’t energy firms pick up the bill?为什么不能能源公司加快条例草案？
More更多 Breaking News突发新闻
Archive 存档
- August 2008 2008年8月
- July 2008 2008年7月
- June 2008 2008年6月
- May 2008 2008年5月
- April 2008 2008年4月
- March 2008 2008年3月
- February 2008 2008年2月
- January 2008 2008年1月
- December 2007 2007年12月
- November 2007 2007年11月
- October 2007 2007年10月
- September 2007 2007年9月
- August 2007 2007年8月
- July 2007 2007年7月
- June 2007 2007年6月
- May 2007 2007年5月
- April 2007 2007年4月
- March 2007 2007年3月
