Not In Our Name 2

Not In Our Name 2

Did you know that the UK is operating a secret prison in a British Army base, wherein at the last roll call there are 62 people subjected to be detained indefinitely without charge or trial?

This mini Guantanamo Bay is located at the British military base at Basra airport in Iraq.

Apparently, there were little known about hearings this week before the House of Lords at which lawyers acting for Hilal al-Jedda, who has dual British-Iraqi nationality, are challenging the legality of his detention which has been on-going for 3 years. There is no reference to the hearings that I can see on the HofL website.

According to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that all those held must be brought before a court to be tried or released they are being held by the British in violation of the Convention.

Furthermore, "The British courts recently ruled that the Convention covers British forces operating abroad in situations over which they have control".

Nevertheless, "The government argues that Mr Jedda can be held indefinitely, along with the other detainees, because British troops in southern Iraq are part of a UN-backed international force and therefore operate under a UN security council mandate and are not covered by European human rights law. The security council resolution which backed the international force in Iraq after the invasion had become a fait accompli authorises "internment where necessary for imperative reasons of security".

"International lawyers say evidence must be shown that internment is truly necessary. They also argue that the detainees are being held in an area controlled by British - and, increasingly, Iraqi - forces and not the UN or its institutions".

"The US and UK are manipulating international law through the security council to their own ends. The domestic law consequences are startling. Mr Jedda is subjected to indefinite executive detention and his habeas corpus right displaced by a decision of the security council sitting in New York".

"The Law Lords ruling is expected before Christmas".

It would seem to me, given that the British courts have already ruled that the ECHR applies to the British forces and those under their control, the government hasn't really got a legal leg to stand on. Not only do I believe that the UK is acting illegally in this case, but I recall that what made the Iraq war illegal under international law was the absence of a UN Security resolution No.1441. The US and UK went in anyway. When it suited them they ignored the UN. Now when it suits them they are trying to hide behind the UN. Surely, they cannot have it both ways?