Evidence gained by torture allowed by British judges

“The accused has confessed to numerous acts of terror, thefts, blackmail, computer hacking, making rude remarks at the Prime Minister, dozens of overdue library books, the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the blowing up of the shuttles Columbia and Challenger, and the murder of her royal Majesty Queen Elizabeth the First.”

This is going to be the result keep up the good work UK :k:

============================

Evidence gained by torture allowed by British judges

From Lord Justice Laws’ judgement: ‘I am quite unable to see that any … principle prohibits the Secretary of State from relying … on evidence … which has or may have been obtained by torture by agencies of other states over which he has no powers of direction’

By Robert Verkaik Legal Affairs Correspondent
12 August 2004

The use of torture to obtain evidence against suspected terrorists was endorsed yesterday by the Court of Appeal in a ruling that has brought Britain into conflict with international human rights campaigners.

Two of the country’s senior judges granted the Home Secretary the right to hold terror suspects on the basis of intelligence from tortured prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other US detention camps.

Human rights groups and experts on international law said Britain had, in effect, been given the green light to trawl for evidence from torture victims across the world.

The controversial guidance emerged in the court’s decision to reject appeals from 10 foreign nationals held for more than two years without charge or trial in British prisons under emergency terror laws introduced by David Blunkett after the 11 September attacks.

None of the men is accused of terrorist acts, only that they belong to banned terrorist organisations. Two of the 10 have voluntarily left Britain and are bringing their appeals from abroad. But Mr Blunkett, writing in today’s Independent, says yesterday’s judgment on the fate of the detainees is a clear vindication of his policy on terrorism. “As Home Secretary. I must balance legal theory with the practical job of protecting people,” he says.

Complete Article