The government is, on behalf of you and me, involved in the worst type of man’s inhumanity to man — torture. Yet with the honourable exceptions of William Hague and Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative party, the party I wholeheartedly support, the party that talks of compassionate conservatism, is failing to speak out about it when it should be shouting from the rooftops. Think of your wife or child screaming in unbearable pain, deliberately inflicted. The mere thought is enough for me to know that torture is unacceptable under any circumstances.
Yet some people need to be convinced by other arguments. There are plenty. The first is that torture does not work. General Massu, a French commander in Algeria, said, ‘Torture is not indispensable in time of war; we could have got along without it very well.’
Another crucial point: torture disgusts most people and our involvement, passive or otherwise, recruits terrorists by making us loathed. Are we really sure that 7 July had nothing to do with British torture in Iraq, or our tacit support of US abuses?
Our legal obligations are clear. ‘No person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.’ Nor may we deport people to where they might be tortured. No exceptions whatever are permitted. So that is that — or rather that should be that. Yet, as a recent report by Human Rights Watch makes clear, we have been ambivalent and worse. The following statement by our own Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, no less, beggars belief: ‘That jurisprudence says you can’t deport people where there is a serious risk of particular things happening to them — death, torture, for example… [so] we’re going to ask the European Court of Human Rights to look at that again.’ He has even sought permission to help the Netherlands in a case which has nothing to do with us, in their attempt to deport a Mr Ramsey to Algeria, where he would be at serious risk. Sadly the Queen’s Speech last week showed that the government was unconcerned: ‘A Bill will be introduced… to make it easier to deport those who break the law.’
Deportation is indeed the main problem. Tony Blair and Goldsmith do not want the UK to do the torturing. Their scheme is to solicit from countries with a record of torture ‘diplomatic assurances’ that suspects whom we send them will not be tortured. But remember this. These states have already lied by agreeing not to torture anybody and then doing so. So why on earth should their diplomatic assurances be believed? Nor can the situation be monitored successfully. It is in the interests of both the deporting and the receiving country to conclude that there has been no torture. The victim dares not complain to monitors. Any complaint will be met by even more torture when the monitors have left. There are plenty of examples where those deported on the basis of diplomatic assurances have in fact been tortured.
We are also failing in another area. The Americans have been indulging in the appalling practice of ‘extraordinary rendition’. Lacking enough evidence to prosecute suspects, they seize them and send them off to places such as Egypt, Algeria, Jordan, etc., where it is extremely likely, and therefore presumably intended, that they will be tortured.
The UK has more influence on America than any other country. If Tony Blair were to condemn America’s behaviour unequivocally, he would be listened to. His reluctance to do so, and also that of the Conservative opposition, may well reflect fears about the effect that such criticism would have on our alliance with the US. I certainly believe that alliance is extremely important. But there are times when you have to criticise a friend, just as Churchill and Thatcher, both great allies of the Americans, did when they thought it necessary.