Amnesty in Salisbury & South Wiltshire
Promoting human rights from Salisbury UK
The death penalty summary for the last month is published below with thanks to group member Lesley for
compiling it. It contains some good news with four more abolitionist countries and modest progress in USA. Set against that is the dire situation in Saudi, Iran and Pakistan. China is the worlds leader in executions but the figures are a state secret.
Many of the items in the summary are covered in greater detail elsewhere on this blog.
February 2016
In this blog – our longest yet – we reproduce an article published in Dissident Voice which discussed in detail the role the British government is playing in supporting the Saudi government, by supplying arms and providing personnel, in its war in the Yemen. Most of the material here will be familiar to readers but it is useful to have a separate voice. Our local MP Mr John Glen has, so far, been silent on these matters.
It is more than possible to speculate why Prime Minister David Cameron has declared it his mission to scrap the Human Rights Act – which is incorporated into the European Convention on Human Rights – it appears he simply does not believe in human rights.
For example, the fact that Saudi Arabia executed – including beheadings – forty seven people in one day last month, displaying their bodies from gibbets, failed to deter him from having British military experts to work with their Saudi counterparts, advising on which targets – and which people, it seems – to bomb in Yemen. Parliament has not been consulted, thus, without a chance to debate and vote, democracy too has been suspended.
The fact that in May 2013 Saudi also beheaded five Yemenis, then used cranes to display their headless bodies against the skyline (Al-Akhbar, May 21st, 2013) also did not trouble him. Neither did that by November 10th, 2015, the year’s total executions had already reached one hundred and fifty one, the highest for twenty years, in what Amnesty International called “a bloody executions spree.”
But why care about human rights or outright savagery when there are arms to be sold? As written previously, in one three month period last year UK arms sales to Saudi soared by 11,000%. From a mere nine million pounds the preceding three months: “The exact figure for British arms export licences from July to September 2015 was £1,066,216,510 in so-called ‘ML4’ export licenses, which relate to bombs, missiles, rockets, and components of those items.”
Priority Countries
Cameron’s government treats such barbarism with astonishing sanguinity. For instance, it has come to light that in 2011 the UK drew up a list of thirty: “‘priority countries’ where British diplomats would be ‘encouraged’ to ‘proactively drive forward’ and make progress towards abolishing the death penalty over five years.’ “
Saudi Arabia was not on the list, an omission which Amnesty International’s Head of Policy, Alan Hogarth called “astonishing.” (Independent, January 5th, 2016.) However, a Foreign Office spokeswoman told the Independent that: “A full list of countries of concern was published in March 2015 in the (UK) Annual Human Rights Report and that includes Saudi Arabia and its use of the death penalty.”
Wrong. In the Report under “Abolition of the Death Penalty”, there is much concentration on countries in the (UK) “Commonwealth Caribbean” and a casual, subservient nod at the US, but no mention of Saudi. Under “The Death Penalty”, Jordan and Pakistan, were mentioned, as was the “particular focus on two … regions, Asia and the Commonwealth Caribbean.” Singapore, Malaysia, China and Taiwan, Japan (the latter, three executions in 2014) Suriname and Vietnam are cited. Saudi Arabia is nowhere to be found.
Under the heading Torture Prevention, there is a quote by David Cameron: “Torture is always wrong” (December 9th, 2014). Paragraph one includes: “The impact on victims, their families and their communities is devastating. It can never be justified in any circumstance.” A number of countries are listed. No prizes for guessing, in spite of medieval torture practices, which is not.
However, under “Criminal Justice and the Rule of Law” there is:
The Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) issued revised guidance on the human rights aspects of OSJA (Overseas Security and Justice Guidance) in February 2014. The guidance ensures that officials do their utmost to identify risks of UK actions causing unintended human rights consequences.
What an irony as David Cameron is currently moving heaven and earth to halt legal action against British soldiers accused of acts of extreme human rights abuses in Iraq. As Lesley Docksey has written:
The said ‘brave servicemen’ are in danger of being taken to Court over their abusive treatment, and in some cases murder, of Iraqi detainees during the invasion of Iraq. Hundreds of complaints have been lodged with the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT), which was investigating between 1,300 -1,500 cases. Many are simple complaints of ill treatment during detention, but some are far more serious:
Worse, the British government is considering taking action against one of the law firms dealing with some of the cases, Leigh Day, with another, Public Interest Lawyers, in their sights. When it comes to hypocrisy, David Cameron is hard to beat.
Arms sales
Worth noting is that in the UK government’s own list of “countries of humanitarian concern”, according to the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT), the UK has sold weapons to twenty four out of twenty seven of them, with Saudi Arabia in a deal to purchase seventy two Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft in a deal worth an eventual £4.5 Billion.
Aside from the purchase of the Typhoon jets, major deals between Saudi Arabia and British companies include a £1.6bn agreement for Hawk fighter jets and bulk sales of machine guns, bombs and tear gas. [We can add here that Salisbury firm Chemring’s accounts show a high level of sales to Saudi sufficient to be separately identified under company law]
In fact, Saudi Arabia have access to twice as many British-made warplanes as the RAF does, while bombs originally stockpiled by Britain’s Armed Forces are being sent to Saudi Arabia” – to currently decimate Yemen.
The overriding message is that human rights are playing second fiddle to company profits,
said CAAT spokesperson Andrew Smith, adding:
The Government and local authorities up and down the country are profiting directly from the bombing of Yemen. Challenging them to divest from Saudi Arabia … is something people can do directly.
In the light of a fifty one page UN Report on the bombing of Yemen obtained by various parties on January 27th, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn called for an immediate suspension of arms sales to Saudi, pending the outcome of an independent Inquiry. David Cameron stated, farcically, that: “Britain had the strictest rules governing arms sales of almost any country, anywhere in the world.”
However, in one of the key findings, the UN Report says:
The panel documented that the coalition had conducted airstrikes targeting civilians and civilian objects, in violation of international humanitarian law, including camps for internally displaced persons and refugees; civilian gatherings, including weddings; civilian vehicles, including buses; civilian residential areas; medical facilities; schools; mosques; markets, factories and food storage warehouses; and other essential civilian infrastructure, such as the airport in Sana’a, the port in Hudaydah and domestic transit routes.
It adds:
The panel documented 119 coalition sorties relating to violations of international humanitarian law. It also reported cases of civilians fleeing and being chased and shot at by helicopters. Moreover it stated that the humanitarian crisis was compounded by the Saudi blockade of ships carrying fuel, food and other essentials that are trying to reach Yemen.
The panel said that: “civilians are disproportionately affected” and deplored tactics that: “constitute the prohibited use of starvation as a method of warfare.” (Emphasis added.)
David Mepham, UK Director of Human Rights Watch commented:
For almost a year, Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond has made the false and misleading claim that there is no evidence of laws of war violations by the UK’s Saudi ally and other members of the coalition.
The UK Ministry of Defence, declining to say how many UK military advisers were in Saudi Command and Control Centres, said that the UK was: “… offering Saudi Arabia advice and training on best practice targeting techniques to help ensure continued compliance with International Humanitarian Law.” (Guardian, January 27th, 2016.) Yet another quote from the “You could not make this up” files.
It has to be wondered whether the Ministry’s “best practice targeting techniques” includes the near one hundred attacks on medical facilities between March and October 2015, a practice which compelled the International Committee of the Red Cross, in November, to declare the organization: “appalled by the continuing attacks on health care facilities in Yemen …”
They issued their statement after:
Al-Thawra hospital, one of the main health care facilities in Taiz which is providing treatment for about fifty injured people every day was reportedly shelled several times …)
It is not the first time health facilities have been attacked … Close to a hundred similar incidents have been reported since March 2015. (Emphases added.)
Deliberate attacks on health facilities represent a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law (IHL).”
An earlier attempt to have the UN Human rights Council establish an Inquiry failed due to objections from Saudi Arabia, who, with help from Britain, currently Chairs an influential panel on the same Human Rights Council. Farce is alive and well in the corridors of the UN.
Attacks on medical facilities
The repeated attacks on a targeted medical facility and other IHL protected buildings and places of sanctuary is a testimony to the total disregard for International Humanitarian Law, by the British, US and their allies and those they “advise”, from the Balkans to Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and now Yemen.
However, in spite of the horrors under which Yemenis are suffering and dying, and Saudi’s appalling 
human rights deficit, UK Foreign Office Minister Tobias Ellwood, an American-born former soldier, in a visit to Saudi Arabia last month was quoted in the country’s Al Watan newspaper as revealing:
the ignorance of the British to the notable progress in Saudi Arabia in the field of human rights, confirming throughout the visit of a British FCO delegation… that he had expressed his opinion regarding the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia before the British Parliament, and that the notable progress in this area has been obscured.
The Foreign Office strongly denied that Ellwood had expressed such a view.
The Saudi led, British advised and US ”intelligence” provided coalition is reported to have formed “an independent team of experts” to assess “incidents” (which should be described as outrages and war crimes) in order to reach “conclusions, lessons learned …” etc. Thus, as ever, the arsonist is to investigate the cause of the fire.
Amnesty, Human rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières (who have had three medical facilities bombed) and The Campaign to Stop Bombing in Yemen have all called for an independent Inquiry with the power to hold those responsible for atrocities to account. None of which, however, would bring back the dead, restore the disabled, disfigured, limbless, or beautiful, ruined, ancient Yemen – another historical Paradise lost.
Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist with special knowledge of Iraq. Author, with Nikki van der Gaag, of Baghdad in the Great City series for World Almanac books, she has also been Senior Researcher for two Award winning documentaries on Iraq, John Pilger’s Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq and Denis Halliday Returns for RTE (Ireland.) Read other articles by Felicity.
This article was posted on Wednesday, February 3rd, 2016 at 11:30am and is filed under Death Penalty, Human Rights, Militarism, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, United Nations, War Crimes, Weaponry, Yemen.
Amnesty International believes that there is credible evidence that the UK has been involved in grave human rights violations perpetrated against people held overseas by other authorities since the attacks in the USA on 11 September 2001.
The UN Convention Against Torture states that ‘no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture’. It also states there should be a prompt and impartial investigation wherever there is reasonable ground to believe an act of torture has been committed.
The Human Rights Act 1998 also prohibits torture under any circumstances, and that obligation implicitly requires a prompt independent investigation of credible allegations – the more so when there appears to be a ‘systemic’ problem. The existence of evidence requires the establishment of an independent, impartial and thorough judge-led inquiry, now. Credible allegations implicate the UK in torture or other ill-treatment, unlawful detentions and renditions. Over the years, Amnesty International and others have documented cases of the UK’s involvement in these abuses, including:
Testimony
A number of individuals – including former Guantánamo Bay detainees – have spoken publicly about UK involvement in their mistreatment. Shaker Aamer, who was released from Guantánamo in October 2015, after nearly 14 years without charge or trial, has said for example that a UK official was in the room when his head was beaten against a wall.
In 2008 the High Court confirmed that the UK, through its security service MI5, had facilitated the interrogation of Binyam Mohamed in the knowledge that his initial detention in Pakistan was unlawful. Then, during a two-year period, the UK continued to facilitate interviews conducted on behalf of the US authorities when it must have realised that Binyam Mohamed was being held unlawfully by a third country and knew or ought to have known that there was a real risk that he was being tortured.
Proper investigation needed
The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has now been given the task of investigating allegations of UK complicity in torture, but Amnesty International, along with many other anti-torture organisations including the UN, believes that the ISC is wholly unsuited to the task in hand. The structural limitations of the ISC, particularly its lack of power and independence from government, means that any investigation the ISC conducts is unlikely to get to the truth, and cannot satisfy the UK’s human rights obligations. The ISC is not a traditional Parliamentary committee, even though it is made up of parliamentarians. Ministers ultimately decide what evidence the Committee can see, with the Prime Minister controlling what it can publish and even who can be a member. Crucially, the government retains the right to withhold information considered to be “sensitive” or on grounds of national security from the ISC. The definition of what constitutes sensitive information is extremely broad and notably includes information provided by a foreign intelligence agency which can object to further disclosure of that information. Any Secretary of State can determine material is sensitive and in the interests of national security should not be disclosed to the ISC.
Poor record
The ISC has a poor record in holding the intelligence services to account. In 2007, three years after the rendition of the Libyan families, the ISC produced a report which said that there was “no evidence that the UK Agencies were complicit in any “Extraordinary Rendition” operations.”
Historical context
In July 2010, the Prime Minister promised to establish an independent inquiry into allegations of UK involvement in torture and other human rights violations with respect to individuals detained abroad in the context of counter-terrorism operations. At the time, David Cameron specifically ruled out the possibility of the ISC carrying out the investigation, recognising that an inquiry led by a judge who is “fully independent of Parliament, party and Government” was required “to get to the bottom of the case”.
In 2011 the Detainee Inquiry was established, led by the retired judge Sir Peter Gibson. Amnesty International and a number of other organisations felt that the Detainee Inquiry fell short of the UK’s international human rights obligations and domestic obligations under the Human Rights Act to fully and independently investigate allegations of UK involvement in torture and other ill-treatment. Of most concern was that the government retained final say on what material could be disclosed to the public and that the protocol did not provide for an independent mechanism to decide on disclosure of national security material.
In January 2012 the Detainee Inquiry was suspended, after Scotland Yard announced a criminal investigation into joint UK/Libyan operations which had resulted in the rendition of Libyan opposition figures. Those investigations are ongoing.
In December 2013 the Detainee Inquiry interim report was published. It highlighted that the evidence it had received indicated that UK agents were aware of abuse of some detainees by other governments and that the UK government may have been involved in rendition. It outlined 27 separate issues that should be subjected to further investigation. Amnesty and others expected this to be followed by a proper full judge led inquiry.
Instead, on 19 December 2013, it was announced that the ISC had been tasked with examining allegations of UK complicity in torture and other ill-treatment of detainees held overseas, which had previously been the subject of the Detainee Inquiry. In September 2015 Dominic Grieve was appointed as the new Chair of the ISC. There is as yet no news on its work in this area.
Last year we wrote to our local MP Mr John Glen to ask his government to be more assertive with the Saudi government in view of their appalling human rights record. This was prompted by the death penalty group which was concerned by the mounting tide of executions in that country. We received a bland reply from both Mr Glen and from Mr Tobias Ellwood of the Foreign Office (FCO) saying that behind the scenes, representations were being made.
No sooner had we posted details of the letters from the two politicians, when news was received of plans to drop the requirement of ministers to obey foreign treaties. Also, explicit reference to the abolition of the death penalty was removed from government policy. We have in previous blogs pointed to the continuing sale of arms to Saudi Arabia despite their role in the war in Yemen. Then came the astonishing news that British and American service personnel were present in the control centre for Saudi military actions.
All the while, the human rights record in Saudi remains dire and the year started with the mass execution of 47 people. When Mr Ellwood was asked in Parliament to condemn the mass execution he declined to do so. Today, we learn from the Independent newspaper that Mr Ellwood is reported in various Saudi and middle eastern newspapers as having urged Saudi Arabia to ‘do a better job at trumpeting its human rights successes’. He was addressing the Saudi Arabian National Society for Human Rights [an English version is available] in Riyadh and added that ‘British people were unaware of the notable progress being made.’ Many human rights groups have said that Mr Ellwood’s remarks are astonishing. FCO has denied that such remarks were made by him and the matter could easily be cleared up by publishing his speech.
Today, the Guardian newspaper published extracts from a leaked UN report into the airstrikes carried out by the Saudis on Yemen. The report said that:
…many of the attacks involved multiple civilian objects [and that] of the 119 sorties the panel identified 146 targeted objects. There were three alleged cases of civilians fleeing residential bombings and being chased and shot at by helicopters.
So far, 5,800 people have been killed in the conflict. On Wednesday, the leader of the opposition Mr Jeremy Corbyn asked the Prime Minister for an independent inquiry into the policy on arms exports to Saudi Arabia in view of the UN report. As the weeks have gone by, the drip, drip of revelations, the continued sale of arms to the Saudis, the presence of our military personnel in the control centre of the Saudi operations, our help in getting a Saudi to get onto the UN’s Human Rights Council, and speeches by a FCO minister, has painted a picture of complicity in a brutal conflict in Yemen and connivance in the politics of repression in Saudi itself.
From Mr Glen there has been silence. His column in the Salisbury Journal this week refers to the Maldives [YouTube] and his involvement and concern about human rights abuses there is of course to be welcomed and applauded. But when, we may ask, is he going to express concern about the much greater level of human rights violations and killings taking place in Saudi Arabia and Yemen?
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook. If you would like to join us, go to the ‘Joining’ tab at the top of the home page. 
Sources: The Independent; Belfast Telegraph; Amnesty International; Guardian
We are highlighting the case of Gennadii Yokovitskii in Belarus and asking that you find time to write to the relevant authorities please. Belarus is the last country in Europe which exercises the death penalty and as much of what goes on is secret, there is a lack of an informed debate within the country.
The justice system is flawed with many convictions based on forced confessions.
When the executions actually happen is unknown to the victim, his or her family or their legal representative which adds considerably to the stress the family is suffering. After the executions have taken place, the authorities will not release the body or even say where it is buried.
Amnesty is opposed to the death penalty in all cases. There is no available image of Gennadii.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
This urgent action concerns the body of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr’s which, despite repeated requests, has still not been returned to the family. This followed his execution along with 46 others. The Saudi’s are showing signs of irritation at the negative publicity they are getting following the mass executions which took place recently and at the increasing numbers of executions generally.
Hardly surprising. Because, in addition to execution itself, there are a number of other matters which are troubling about his arrest, trial and subsequent treatment. Namely:
Not exactly a fair system. Full details of this is contained on the urgent action below and we would be grateful if you could find the time to write to the authorities. Why does it matter? Because the UK government continues to turn a blind eye to the human rights violations in that country and would prefer to carry on being a major arms supplier. This is a time of change in Saudi with a new generation taking over. The rapprochement with Iran is troubling them and the decline in the oil price is going to cause major problems. Carrying our executions of the Shia minority who were demonstrating not engaged in violence is not a productive way forward.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook. If you would like to join us please go to the ‘Joining’ link on the home page for details. It is free to join the local group.
Over the past few weeks, we have been drawing attention to the situation in Yemen and in particular, the involvement of our government in supplying arms and personnel to the Saudis who are bombing that country. There is now a petition by Amnesty International asking people to send a message to the UK government asking them to put a stop to this. It is easy to sign and you can send a text message from your mobile phone to 70505 and the message is HALT1.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook. If you would like to become more involved, read the ‘Joining’ tab.
With all the current focus on Saudi Arabia and their barbaric activities, we forget that across the water is Iran which is the second highest executioner of its people after China. This urgent action concerns a Hamid Ahmadi who was 17 when arrested for allegedly stabbing another person. He was not allowed access to a lawyer or to his family and was allegedly tortured into confessing. He is now 24 and is being tried for a second time. Attached is a document which gives all the details and background.
If you have time we would be grateful if you could write.
Follow us on twitter
The last set of pictures of the panels on the tapestry currently in the entrance to the Chapter House at Salisbury Cathedral. Each panel represents an article from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Video
Article 26: Everyone has the right to an education, elementary schools should be free and compulsory. Contributed from the Southampton City group.
Article 27: Everyone has the right to freely participate in the cultural life of the community. Team effort this by Fay, Janet, Sharon, Sue and Gretel, members of the Romsey group.
Article 28: Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set out here can be fully respected. The third panel by our Regional Representative, Caroline Butler.
Article 29: Everyone has duties to the community. This is the second panel in the tapestry contributed by a refugee group, this time GARAS, the Gloucester Action for Refugees and Asylum Seekers. GARAS offers support to those seeking asylum in Gloucestershire; welcoming them when they arrive; advocating for them in their daily struggles; supporting them if they face being sent back, as well as helping them adjust to their long term future if they are recognised as refugees.
Article 30: No one has the right to act in such a way as to destroy the rights and freedoms set in in this declaration. The fourth panel from the Southampton City group.
End
Nearly there: this is the fifth batch of detailed pictures of the tapestry now in the entrance to the Chapter House at Salisbury Cathedral. Previous blogs have shown the first twenty panels. Any errors of if you want to add some detail, please get in touch and we shall be happy to oblige.
Article 21: Everyone has the right to take part in the government off their country. Voting should be regular and secret, and all votes should have equal value. Another panel from the Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch group.
Article 22: Everyone as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realisation of economic, social and cultural rights. This panel made by the West Wilts group.
Article 23: Everyone has the right to work and those doing the same work should get equal pay. Everyone has the right to form and join a trade union. A second panel from the West Wilts group.
Article 24: Everyone has the right to rest and leisure including reasonable working hours and paid holiday. A third panel from the Frome group, this time by Fiona and Jeanne.
Article 25: Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for health and wellbeing. People should be helped if they cannot earn a living. A third panel from the Bristol group.
Amnesty in Salisbury & South Wiltshire 