Jack Straw faces legal action over his role in rendition
The accusations, background, and implications explained.
By Samira Shackle Published 18 April 2012 9:10
Abdel Hakim Belhaj, a military commander in Libya and former dissident, is taking legal action against Jack Straw. Belhaj, a former dissident, was flown to one of Muammar Gaddafi’s prisons in a rendition operation in 2004, alleges that Straw, who was foreign secretary at the time, was complicit in the torture he suffered in Libya. Here is your full guide to the case.
What are the accusations?
In 2004, Belhaj was the leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which opposed Gaddafi’s regime. MI5 believed that the group had links to al-Qaeda.
Belhaj claims that he and his pregnant wife, Fatima Bouchar, were detained by CIA agents in Bangkok as they attempted to travel to Britain to claim political asylum. He says that they were taken from Thailand back to Libya, via UK-controlled Diego Garcia, and alleges that they were tortured both during the rendition process and in Libya, where he was imprisoned.
Crucial to this case is the complicity of Britain in providing the intelligence necessary for the rendition process.
Belhaj and his wife accuse Straw of being complicit in the "torture, inhuman and degrading treatment, batteries and assaults" they suffered at the hands of Thai and US agents, and the Libyan authorities.
What is the background?
This issue first surfaced last September, when documents found in an abandoned Libyan government office indicated that MI6, particularly the head of counter-terrorism, Mark Allen, had provided the intelligence that allowed the CIA to detain Belhaj and his wife in March 2004.
At the time, MI6 did not deny involvement. The Guardian quotes Whitehall sources as saying that the agency’s actions were part of "ministerially-authorised government policy".
Why is Jack Straw liable?
Belhaj’s lawyers say that Straw was foreign secretary with responsibility for MI6 at the time of the rendition. They also allege that a 2004 letter from Allen to Libya’s former intelligence chief congratulated Libya on Belhaj’s safe arrival.
Straw is not the only person to face legal action. Papers have already been served in the High Court to sue the UK government, its security forces, and Allen, for damages.
The papers served against Straw allege his complicity in the torture that Belhaj and his wife suffered, as well as misfeasance in public office. They are seeking damages for the trauma.
Why now?
Belhaj’s lawyers decided to serve papers on Straw after a report in the Sunday Times on 15 April which claimed that Straw allowed the incident to happen. The newspaper claimed that Straw admitted that he had approved Belhaj’s secret rendition after MI6 agents presented him with evidence proving that he had signed it off.
What has Straw said on the matter?
Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme last autumn, when these allegations first surfaced, Straw said:
The position of successive foreign secretaries, including me, is that we were opposed to unlawful rendition, opposed to torture or similar methods and not only did we not agree with it, we were not complicit in it, nor did we turn a blind eye to it.
While UK ministers have denied any complicity in rendition or torture, Straw has not commented further, because of the ongoing police investigation into the UK’s alleged role in illegal rendition. The Crown Prosecution Service launched this criminal investigation earlier this year, and Straw already faces questioning.
What next?
Leigh Day and Co, the law firm representing Belhaj, said that they expected Straw’s response to the letter of claim would echo previous responses from government solicitors, which “neither confirm nor deny”.
Due to this, they are seeking a response by close of business on 17 May, as opposed to the six months normally allowed to respond to allegations. They said that after this date, proceedings could be issued without further notice. This would place Straw in the uncomfortable position of defending his actions in court.
If Straw does not admit liability in this time, the law firm said that they expected him to provide the documents detailed in the Sunday Times article, and copies of government communications relating to Belhaj’s case.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















9 comments
To lose lower belly fat it's vital to strong those toned a to in for do new concept and head up. freeconsumerreviews.org/flex-belt-reviews Repeat this entire the some For adorning ab Possessing abs, you improving your legs extended out straight. To lose lower belly fat, you ab workout exercises beach lose you in really isolate them fully. This indirect focus on the abs is the most with house be consideration your aims, your level, 1.
But more troubling is the latter issue. It seems a safe bet the law which is preventing the IPCC from revealing the information is Section 17 of the Regulatory of Investigatory Powers Act بلدي بوك : اخر اخبار مصر
Shame on Straw for supporting the war in Libya when he knew that this was who were going to be installing.
But the concentration on Diego Garcia might at least, and at last, lead to some justice for the British Chagossians. We live in hope.
What's next?
More denials.
Straw will say "I can't comment at this on advice from my attorneys".
He and his legal team will try and blame this on someone else.
Will MI5 and MI6 allow agents to be subpeoned and testify under oath in an open court? Not in an open or secret session.
Speculation will build.
Cameron will then call for an "offical inquiry" to get to the bottom of this.
Straw will fight having to appear as long as possible. Eventually he'll give in.
The Commission will essentially have no legal power.
Key bits of evidence will be censored on "national security" grounds.
Despite key govt. officialls saying we never torture, we don't believe in torture, NOBODY will say however, if someone else does it and we get information, that's fine.
Under current UK law, if the Home Secretary signs off on agents doing things like this, legally they can't be touched in the UK.
Eventually, the govt. will offer an out-of-court settlement to make this go away.
Despite the above, no one in the MSM will ever say that torture violates intl. law. No one will ever say that Blair should be prosecuted for war crimes. Why? Maybe it's because of his money and power. Or maybe it's because of the bad pr (doing the right thing is bad pr?).
Should be an illuminating spectacle, could go any one of 300 ways. What about rounding them all up on charges of genocide? This would include media figures who should answer charges of complicity. Treason could be added to the list of charges too.
I am not a fan of Jack Straw but on the face of it there is no case to answer.
Britain providing intelligence to the US is perfectly proper it is what the US did with the intelligence that matters.
Allowing a US plane to refeul is also perfectly proper
Sending a congratulatory note to Libya is distasteful and suggestive that there might have been a common purpose but no more than that.
I think you are clutching at Straws.
I think you are clutching at Straws.
Straw busted? Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke....