This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/11/cia-torture-report-british-spy-agencies-discussed-redactions

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
CIA torture report: British spy agencies discussed redactions CIA torture report: British spy agencies discussed redactions
(about 4 hours later)
Britain’s spying agencies did discuss redactions to the CIA torture report on the grounds of national security but not to cover up their own actions, David Cameron’s deputy official spokesman has said. References to Britain’s intelligence agencies were deleted at their request from the damning US report on the CIA’s use of torture after 9/11, it has emerged.
Downing Street said talks had taken place between the UK intelligence agencies and their US counterparts about influencing the contents of the Senate report that revealed brutal and ineffective methods used by the CIA. A spokesman for David Cameron acknowledged the UK had been granted deletions in advance of the publication, contrasting with earlier assertions by No 10. Downing Street said any redactions were only requested on “national security” grounds and contained nothing to suggest UK agencies had participated in torture or rendition.
The admission contrasted with a previous statements made by Number 10. Asked on Wednesday about whether redactions were requested, Cameron’s spokesman initially said there had been “none whatsoever, to my knowledge”. However, the admission will fuel suspicions that the report – while heavily critical of the CIA – was effectively sanitised to conceal the way in which close allies of the US became involved in the global kidnap and torture programme that was mounted after the al-Qaida attacks.
But on Thursday, his deputy official spokesman said: “My understanding is that no redactions were sought to remove any suggestion that there was UK involvement in any alleged torture or rendition. But I think there was a conversation with the agencies and their US counterparts on the executive summary. Any redactions sought there would have been on national security grounds in the way we might have done with any other report.” On Wednesday, the day the report was published, asked whether redactions had been sought, Cameron’s official spokesman told reporters there had been “none whatsoever, to my knowledge”.
In the wake of the Senate report, the government is now coming under pressure to order a more transparent report about the actions of MI5 and MI6 amid claims of British complicity. However, on Thursday, the prime minister’s deputy official spokesman said: “My understanding is that no redactions were sought to remove any suggestion that there was UK involvement in any alleged torture or rendition. But I think there was a conversation with the agencies and their US counterparts on the executive summary. Any redactions sought there would have been on national security grounds in the way we might have done with any other report.”
Earlier in the day Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, said he was open to the idea of a full public inquiry into the UK’s involvement in torture. Number 10 also said Cameron had not ruled this out if the current investigation by the intelligence and security committee, which meets in secret once a week, does not settle the issue. The two main cases relevant to the involvement of Britain’s spying agencies related to Binyam Mohamed, a UK citizen tortured and secretly flown to Guantánamo Bay, and the abduction of Abdel Hakim Belhaj and Sami-al-Saadi, two prominent Libyan dissidents, and their families, who were flown to Tripoli in 2004 where they were tortured by Muammar Gaddafi’s secret police.
The prime minister’s deputy official spokesperson said the primary focus was this report by parliament’s intelligence and security committee, which is chaired by former foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind. The controversial committee, whose reports are subject to redactions by Number 10, last year took over the work of the Gibson inquiry, which was set up to look into the UK’s treatment of detainees after 9/11. There is no reference at all in the Senate’s 500-page summary report to UK intelligence agencies or the British territory of Diego Garcia used by the US as a military base. But the executive summary contained heavy redactions throughout, prompting speculation that references to US allies has been erased.
But asked whether Cameron was open to a full public inquiry, the deputy spokesperson said: “The PM’s view is the ISC are looking at this at the moment. They have said they will report at the end of next year and when they come back with their report and their findings, we will look at: does that settle the issue?” In the wake of the Senate report, the UK government is coming under increasing pressure to order a more transparent inquiry into the actions of MI5 and MI6 amid claims of British complicity in the US torture programme.
The two main cases relevant to Britain’s spying agencies involve Binyam Mohamed, a UK citizen tortured and secretly flown to Guantánamo Bay, and the abduction of Abdel Hakim Belhaj and Sami-al-Saadi, two prominent Libyan dissidents, and their families, who were flown to Tripoli in 2004 where they were tortured by Muammar Gaddafi’s secret police. Asked about the need for a full public inquiry, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, conceded yesterday that he was open to the idea if an outstanding investigation by the parliamentary intelligence and security committee, which meets weekly in secret, leaves remaining questions unanswered. No 10 also suggested Cameron had not ruled this out if the ISC does not settle the torture issue.
The deputy prime minister said he was completely confident that torture “cannot, will not and is not being used under any circumstances by UK agents”. However, he said, there were still questions about the past which have not yet been answered. The government had initially commissioned an inquiry by retired judge Sir Peter Gibson to look at the UK’s treatment of detainees after 9/11. However, he only managed a preliminary report raising 27 serious questions about the behaviour of the UK security services, before it was replaced by an investigation handled by the ISC in December last year.
Clegg said a preliminary inquiry conducted by Sir Peter Gibson “did not pull its punches in saying frankly the standards were not being adhered to in the way that they should have been in the crucial days after 9/11”, as it raised 27 serious questions about British involvement in practices such as rendition. The ISC’s report on the UK’s involvement in rendition after 9/11 will not, however, be completed before next year’s election, so it is unclear how many members of the nine-strong panel of MPs and peers will still be in parliament to complete the work.
But the Gibson inquiry ended in December last year, after the government announced that the judge led inquiry into torture would be replaced by an investigation handled by the ISC. The current chair, former foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, said that the ISC’s previous examination of the UK’s involvement in rendition in 2007, which absolved the agencies, had “quite rightly been severely criticised, because the committee at the time wasn’t given by MI6 all the material in their files”.
Speaking on his LBC 97.3 radio call-in, the Liberal Democrat leader said the ISC was looking at this first, but he raised the prospect of a full judicial inquiry into the issue if it did not get to the bottom of what had happened. Rifkind said he was confident that that would not happen again. Yet the current ISC investigation will not examine the two key cases of the Libyan dissidents being kidnapped and delivered to the Gaddafi regime because they are the subject of a police inquiry.
“Once the police investigations are done, once this report from the intelligence and security committee is done, we should keep an open mind if we need to about moving to a full judicial inquiry if there are any outstanding questions,” he said. “Because I’m like everyone else, I want the truth out there.” MPs from all three main parties said the UK agencies’ requests for deletions from the US underlined the need for a more transparent public inquiry than the one being conducted by the ISC, which hands its reports to Downing Street for pre-approval.
Clegg said the coalition government had been the first to publish the guidance for how spies handled detainees, but there could be a case for greater transparency. David Davis, the Tory MP and former shadow home secretary, said: “Downing Street’s U-turn on its previous denial that redactions had taken place tell us what we already know – that there was complicity, and that it wasn’t reflected in the Senate report. “We know from the behaviour of the previous government with respect to the Binyam Mohamed case, that the term national security includes national embarrassment.”
He rebutted the suggestion that agencies should use the same methods as terrorists, saying that torturing people meant losing the moral high ground. Sarah Teather, the Lib Dem former children’s minister, also added: “It’s not good enough to kick it into the future and hope a future government will pick it up. We’ve had all sorts of semi-inquiries. Watching what’s happened in the last couple of days, as comments flip around, that’s the experience of campaigners who’ve been trying to get justice on behalf of people who have accused the British intelligence services of acting in this way.”
“Of course you can interrogate people forcefully … but you cannot mistreat and torture people. The devastating truth that has been revealed by this Senate committee report [is that] the idea that you can get to the truth by torturing someone has been categorically shown to be false. In fact, what some people do in that situation is to make things up,” said Clegg. Diane Abbott, the Labour MP, said that “as a first step we need to know what was removed from the reports” and secondly more must be revealed about what UK government ministers knew at the time.
His Lib Dem colleague Sarah Teather has already called for a public inquiry into British complicity in torture. The former children’s minister said: “If the US has managed to do something which is transparent, it really is beholden on us to do something which is similarly transparent. The US is at least trying to be honest about what went on,” she said. “To their shame, the UK authorities are still trying to hide their complicity in torture. We need to know how much ministers knew. And if they didn’t know why not?”
“The inquiries that we have had so far have been pretty slippery … It doesn’t feel very healthy. If we are going to try to put this stuff behind us and move on, we are actually going to have to air some of it.” Earlier Abbott, who ran for the Labour leadership against both Miliband brothers, said ex-foreign secretary David Miliband needed to be “completely transparent” about his involvement in the era.
David Davis, the prominent Conservative backbencher and former leadership candidate, said an inquiry was a necessity. But Ed Miliband came to his brother’s strong defence as he was asked yesterday whether the former cabinet minister had “questions to answer”.
So far Cameron has only pointed to the work of the Gibson report saying he is satisfied that enough is being done to address past wrongs. “He’s talked about these things in the past,” the Labour leader said. “I know how seriously he took these things in government. I know he answered questions about this in the House of Commons while he was in government. He is never someone who would ever countenance the British state getting involved in this sort of activity.”
Asked about the Senate report on the CIA while on a trip to Ankara, Turkey, Cameron said: “In Britain we have had the Gibson inquiry that has now produced a series of questions that the intelligence and security committee will look at. But I am satisfied our system is dealing with all of those issues and I, as prime minister, have issued guidance to all of our agents and others working around the world about how they have to handle these issues in future. Pressed on whether Tony Blair had questions to answer, Ed Miliband said: “Anyone who has read this report will be deeply troubled. I’m not going to speak for that report.
“I am confident this issue has been dealt with from a British perspective and I think I can reassure the British public about that. But overall we should be clear: torture is wrong.” “The government has previously announced an inquiry into these issues, and then held off on the inquiry because there are court cases going on. It’s right to let those court cases take their course here.”