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 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/02/the-uks-shameful-collusion-in-torture

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The UK’s shameful collusion in torture The UK’s shameful collusion in torture
(7 months later)
The government itself identified years ago why an independent judicial inquiry should be established to investigate the allegations of collusion by the UK security and intelligence agencies in rendition and torture (Report, 29 June).The government itself identified years ago why an independent judicial inquiry should be established to investigate the allegations of collusion by the UK security and intelligence agencies in rendition and torture (Report, 29 June).
When David Cameron appointed Peter Gibson to run such an inquiry in July 2010, the then PM said that an intelligence and security committee (ISC) investigation would be inadequate to secure public confidence. Now we see that he was right, but not because of any ISC shortcomingsafter it took over when Gibson’s inquiry was terminated in 2012. The reports the ISC has published under Dominic Grieve are as full as its resources could produce, but Theresa May prevented it from interviewing key junior officials involved.When David Cameron appointed Peter Gibson to run such an inquiry in July 2010, the then PM said that an intelligence and security committee (ISC) investigation would be inadequate to secure public confidence. Now we see that he was right, but not because of any ISC shortcomingsafter it took over when Gibson’s inquiry was terminated in 2012. The reports the ISC has published under Dominic Grieve are as full as its resources could produce, but Theresa May prevented it from interviewing key junior officials involved.
As increasing evidence of collusion has emerged, Cabinet Office strategy has clearly been to limit rather than advance inquiries. The ISC has thrown greater light on this shameful episode but a full accounting requires further inquiry into key ministers and officials involved.Peter GillHonorary visiting fellow, University of LeicesterAs increasing evidence of collusion has emerged, Cabinet Office strategy has clearly been to limit rather than advance inquiries. The ISC has thrown greater light on this shameful episode but a full accounting requires further inquiry into key ministers and officials involved.Peter GillHonorary visiting fellow, University of Leicester
• It is the nature of governments and their spies, if not held to account by a principled and informed electorate and the democratic institutions that go with it, to be self-interested, secretive and ruthless. Now, at last we are beginning to examine, if not yet face up to, the fact that we, and other “western” countries (our “allies”), true to this assertion, are as bad as the “other lot’’, whoever they be. Now we are able to see that when the intelligence services have free rein, they abuse without shame (The breathtaking hypocrisy of the UK’s role in human rights abuses, Editorial, 2 July). Politicians are complicit by their failure to exert oversight – indeed, instead, they compete to demonstrate their faith and pride in them, always asserting that it is necessary in the interests of national security to keep quiet and let them “get on with the job”. Sadly, a supine public goes along with it, fuelled by tales of empire and the cold war, accepting the twin notions that our spies are honourable and only the enemy’s are cruel, cowardly and duplicitous.• It is the nature of governments and their spies, if not held to account by a principled and informed electorate and the democratic institutions that go with it, to be self-interested, secretive and ruthless. Now, at last we are beginning to examine, if not yet face up to, the fact that we, and other “western” countries (our “allies”), true to this assertion, are as bad as the “other lot’’, whoever they be. Now we are able to see that when the intelligence services have free rein, they abuse without shame (The breathtaking hypocrisy of the UK’s role in human rights abuses, Editorial, 2 July). Politicians are complicit by their failure to exert oversight – indeed, instead, they compete to demonstrate their faith and pride in them, always asserting that it is necessary in the interests of national security to keep quiet and let them “get on with the job”. Sadly, a supine public goes along with it, fuelled by tales of empire and the cold war, accepting the twin notions that our spies are honourable and only the enemy’s are cruel, cowardly and duplicitous.
We need to re-examine and reform governmental oversight of our security services, with ministers held to account openly, with due penalty if they fail in that onerous duty. And we, the public, need to challenge our own moral lethargy.Gillian DalleyLondonWe need to re-examine and reform governmental oversight of our security services, with ministers held to account openly, with due penalty if they fail in that onerous duty. And we, the public, need to challenge our own moral lethargy.Gillian DalleyLondon
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
Counter-terrorism policyCounter-terrorism policy
UK security and counter-terrorismUK security and counter-terrorism
David CameronDavid Cameron
Dominic GrieveDominic Grieve
lettersletters
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content