Amnesty Attacks UK No-Torture Pacts

[Hissyspit]

Source: Guardian UK

Amnesty attacks UK no-torture pacts

Diplomatic assurances that deportees will not be tortured 'simply cannot be trusted', says human rights group

Richard Norton-Taylor
The Guardian, Monday 12 April 2010

Britain is singled out as "the most influential and aggressive" promoter of the policy of seeking unenforceable "diplomatic assurances" that individuals deported on security grounds will not be tortured, in an Amnesty International report today.

It calls on the UK and 11 other European countries to immediately end the practice of striking "no-torture" deals. The report – Dangerous Deals: Europe's reliance on diplomatic assurances against torture – says governments are attempting to send foreigners alleged to be security threats to countries where they are at risk of torture or other ill-treatment in exchange for unreliable, unenforceable assurances that they will be treated humanely.

The special immigration appeals commission is due tomorrow to hear the case of an unidentified Ethiopian national threatened with deportation based on a "memorandum of understanding" between the UK and Ethiopia that promises the man will not be tortured upon his return. Amnesty has documented serious human rights abuses in Ethiopia and says diplomatic deals with Ethiopia are an extremely unreliable guide to future treatment in that country.

Julia Hall, Amnesty's expert on counter-terrorism and human rights in Europe, said: "Assurances against torture from governments that routinely practise such abuse simply cannot be trusted. European governments that accept these hollow promises are undermining the absolute prohibition of torture."

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/12/amnesty-torture-deportation-diplomacy

[naaman fletcher]

1. This seems kind of dumb..

England has been involved with torture. England has been embarassed by it. So England says no more torture and signs pacts. So Amnesty attacks them?

Wouldn't it be more product to say "This is great in light of the fact of how bad england has been on this issue"?

[Iowa]

3. Hell no!

If they're still sending people off to places where they are likely to be tortured, they deserve all the scorn and derision Amnesty is heaping on them. This is state sponsored torture we're talking about - real people being tortured. Incremental or superficial improvements in a country's torture program isn't something to be praised. Fuck man... what in the world are you thinking?

[naaman fletcher]

5. OK I get it, I misread it I guess, you are correct. nt.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. The point is that Britain is just taking the torturing countries' words for it

Britain is saying "we're sending these people back to your country, but please don't torture them, because you're not supposed to. There's a good chap". And the other country says "torture? Us? Perish the thought. We'd never do something like that, would we, lads?", leaves the victim free for a day or two, and then has the secret police pick him up and start torturing him, when no-one's looking. And no one is really surprised when that happens, including the British government.

[Solly Mack]

2. K&R

[melm00se]

6. so let me get this straight

country A wants to kick out for some legally defined and allowed reason and return that person to their home country B. Country B has said that they won't take a rubber hose to the guy but if they do, country A is stuck with this undesirable?