Tony Blair knew of a secret interrogation policy which effectively led to British citizens being tortured in counter-terrorism investigations, it was claimed yesterday. The policy was devised after 9/11 and offered guidance to MI5 and MI6 agents questioning detainees in Afghanistan that they knew were being mistreated by the U.S. military. The British intelligence officers were given written instructions that they could not ′be seen to condone′ torture and must not ′engage in any activity yourself that involves inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners′.
But they were also told they had no obligation to prevent any detainees from being mistreated. ′Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this,′ said the policy. MI5 and MI6 officers were sent the instructions in January 2002, which told them they might consider complaining to U.S. officials about mistreatment of detainees ′if circumstances allow′. Mr Blair indicated he was aware of the policy in 2004 after photographs were published showing the abuse of prisoners at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Earlier this week Foreign Secretary David Miliband told MPs that the policy was changed around that time, becoming more ′comprehensive and formal′. In a letter to Parliament′s Intelligence and Security Committee in May 2004, the then prime minister indicated that rather than considering making a complaint, ′UK intelligence personnel interviewing or witnessing the interviews of detainees are instructed to report if they believe detainees are being treated in an inhumane or degrading way′. A spokesman for Mr Blair said: ′It is completely untrue that Mr Blair has ever authorised the use of torture.
′He is opposed to it in all circumstances. Neither has he ever been complicit in the use of torture. ′For the record, also, Mr Blair believes that our security services do a superb job of protecting our country in difficult circumstances and that it is not surprising, following the attacks on September 11th 2001, that there was a heightened sense of the dangers the country faced from terrorism. ′None of this amounts to condoning the use of torture.′ According to Philippe Sands QC, the director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College London, the original policy almost certainly breaches international human rights law. He says this is because it takes no account of Britain′s obligation to avoid complicity under the United Nations convention on torture. The Government is currently under pressure to come clean on UK intelligence gathering after a series of allegations that MI5 agents colluded in torture. Last month, lawyers for Jamil Rahman, a British citizen who grew up in South Wales, announced plans to sue then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, saying he was falsely imprisoned in Bangladesh, beaten and forced to make a false confession. He claims MI5 officers turned a blind eye to the torture, leaving the room while he was beaten then returning to continue interrogating him. His allegations echo that of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, who said he was tortured in Pakistan and Morocco with the knowledge of MI5. The 30-year-old Ethiopian says he was beaten and deprived of sleep to try to make him confess to an Al Qaeda ′dirty bomb′ plot. The U.S. detained Mohamed, who had lived in London, because it suspected he was a terrorist who had fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. His treatment is already the subject of an unprecedented police investigation of an MI5 officer. Scotland Yard is currently investigating reports that the security services were complicit in the abuse of 29 prisoners. | 
