UK
authorities' refusal to accept yesterday's judgment amounts to
persecution
News Release Issued by the International Secretariat of Amnesty
International
AI INDEX: EUR 45/010/2004 9 March 2004
The decision by the UK
authorities to challenge yesterday's judgment by the Special
Immigration
Appeals Commission (SIAC) that the case for detaining a Libyan
man, known as M, as a "suspected international
terrorist" was "not established" amounts
to persecution, said Amnesty
International today.
"Having been told that this man, interned without charge
or trial for 16 months, should be set free,
the UK authorities have chosen to stoop to lower depths. By seeking
leave to appeal against this
judgment the government has effectively moved the goalposts.
Appealing against the SIAC decision
is tantamount to appealing against an acquittal verdict. They
should allow the judgment to stand," Amnesty International said.
Amnesty International noted
that the SIAC judgment stated that the security services' assessments
were "not reliable", and that "reasonable suspicion" that
M was a "suspected international terrorist" was "not established".
M has been held in detention without charge or trial, exclusively
on the basis
of secret evidence, since November 2002.
On the basis of this judgment, and the cancelling
of a deportation order, M should have been
released immediately. Instead the UK authorities sought and were
granted an initial 24-hour stay of
M's release so as to allow his continuing detention, while permission
to appeal against the SIAC
ruling was being sought. Amnesty International understands that
the stay has been further
extended until next week.
The SIAC ruled that some
of the UK authorities' assertions were "clearly
misleading" and "inaccurate"; that they "exaggerated" the
extent to which the evidence supported "the links alleged
between ... [M] and Al Qa'ida linked extremists"; and that
the assertion that M "was considered to
be a member of an international terrorist group by reason of
his membership of LIFG [Libyan Islamic
Fighting Group] .... should never have been included, particularly
as it was accepted that the LIFG
was not regarded as a current threat to national security".
The SIAC added that a summary
of a Special Branch report was "inaccurate
and conveyed an
unfair impression". Overall, the SIAC found that the UK
authorities' view of M was "unreasonable",
and expressed concern that "too often assessments have been
made based on material which
does not on analysis support them".
Background
Amnesty International believes
that the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 (ATCSA) is
discriminatory -- there is one set of rules for UK nationals
countries. It effectively allows non-nationals to be treated
as if they have been "charged" with a
criminal offence, "convicted" without a trial and "sentenced" to
an open-ended term of
imprisonment. The UK government has effectively created a shadow
criminal justice system for
non-UK nationals which fails to meet international standards
for a fair trial. The system permits
potentially indefinite detention on the basis of secret "evidence" and
allows the use of "evidence" extracted under torture.
In December 2003, the Committee of Privy Counsellors, who had
been charged with reviewing the
ATCSA, recommended the urgent repeal of ATCSA powers allowing
non-UK nationals to be
detained potentially indefinitely.
Amnesty International opposes detention under Part 4 of the
ATCSA. It is detention ordered by the
executive, without charge or trial, for an unspecified and potentially
unlimited period of time,
principally on the basis of secret evidence which the people
concerned have never heard or seen,
and which they were therefore unable to effectively challenge.
The organization calls on the UK government to release all persons
detained under the ATCSA
unless they are charged with a recognizably criminal offence
and tried by an independent and
impartial court in proceedings which meet international standards
of fairness.
|