• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Britain to face EU Court on torture allegations

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,101
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Allegations that the UK's intelligence agencies have colluded in the torture of British citizens during overseas counter-terrorism investigations have reached the European courts.

In what is expected to be first of a series of applications to the European court of human rights, lawyers representing Salahuddin Amin are arguing that he has been a victim of torture and was denied the right to a fair trial.

The same legal team have also lodged proceedings on behalf of Amin at the high court in London, suing the director generals of MI5 and MI6, the Home Office, the Foreign Office and the attorney general.

Amin says that he was beaten, whipped, deprived of sleep and threatened with an electric drill while being asked questions that would subsequently be put to him again during non-violent interviews by two MI5 officers.

Allegations that Britain colluded in torture of terror suspects reach European court | World news | The Guardian

:doh
We have no chance at EUCoHR.
May as well call it a defeat and throw in the towel and save us millions in legal money
 
A union, made up of European countries, is going to hold court on another country for allegations of torture? Whatta' joke!
 
The UK is one of the worst offenders of human rights within the EU, at least from the amount of judgements against them. The Thatcher years were marred with judgements against the UK over its abuse of people in Northern Ireland.
 
It is a shame that they gave up their sovereignty.
 
It is a shame that they gave up their sovereignty.

It is a shame that British governments see the need to break basic human rights of its citizens time and time again.
 
It is a shame that British governments see the need to break basic human rights of its citizens time and time again.
As far as I am concerned, giving up sovereignty is far worse.
 
The UK is one of the worst offenders of human rights within the EU, at least from the amount of judgements against them. The Thatcher years were marred with judgements against the UK over its abuse of people in Northern Ireland.

Oh please, there terrorists, scum of the earth, lowlife dogs. I despise there existence and i hope they all rot in hell with there godamn Jihad. These people need to be tortured, should be tortured, if its going to get good intel out of them and save many lives.

As far as I am concerned, giving up sovereignty is far worse.

So, so, so so true.
 
Oh please, there terrorists, scum of the earth, lowlife dogs. I despise there existence and i hope they all rot in hell with there godamn Jihad. These people need to be tortured, should be tortured, if its going to get good intel out of them and save many lives.

So you are saying that the policies of Maggie Thatcher and other PMs against the catholic people of Northern Ireland during the troubles was some how justified? They are after all citizens of the UK but had less rights than some one like me visiting the UK for a week.....
 
The UK is one of the worst offenders of human rights within the EU, at least from the amount of judgements against them. The Thatcher years were marred with judgements against the UK over its abuse of people in Northern Ireland.

That doesn't matter.
It should be British High Court and Supreme Court passing judgement on the Government. Not Europe.
 
The UK is one of the worst offenders of human rights within the EU, at least from the amount of judgements against them. The Thatcher years were marred with judgements against the UK over its abuse of people in Northern Ireland.

Overall, the nations of Europe have the worst history of human rights in the world.
 
The UK ought to reclaim it's sovereignty and free itself from the Euros.
 
That doesn't matter.
It should be British High Court and Supreme Court passing judgement on the Government. Not Europe.

LOL give me a freaking break. You are so anti Europe that you cant even get your history or your definitions in order.

First off, lets be very very clear here. The European Convention on Human Rights was not only promoted heavily by the UK, but also had UK "liberty" laws as its base. It is a very British convention with huge British thumb prints all over it.

Secondly it was created before the EEC/EU every existed (1950) and had a brit at its head at the start. It has a British judge today too. Hence also it has nothing to do with the EU/EEC.

Thirdly, this convention was drafted with more modern wording on the basis of the English bill of rights, American bill of rights and the French Declaration of the rights of men. It is what has secured our basic human rights, like the right to vote, freedom of speech and so on, through out Europe for 60 years.

Fourth.. the UK signed and ratified this convention in 1953 and signed it in 1950. You have lived under said convention for over 60 years and time and time again the convention and court system has upheld very basic freedoms in the UK, that consecutive governments (mostly conservative btw) attempted to take away from all British or just parts it did not like. So coming now, 60 years later claiming some kind of "ceding of sovereignty" bs just because there is a case brought up by a bunch of supposed terrorists, is just pathetic. The UK has a history of breaching parts of the convention and are you telling me that just because they are suspected terrorists that it is okay to break human rights? It aint the first time that "terrorists" have brought cases in front of the court and against the UK. In some cases they won and in other case they lost.

How about Soering Vs the UK? It was this court that yet again "bonked" the UK government on the head for attempting to extradite a German national to the US where he could face the death penalty. I mean come on... it is a basic provision of the charter..

Or how about being gay in Northern Ireland before 1980? You do know that it was illegal and sodomy was banned right? Who got that statue removed.. not your precious government, nor your court system.. no it was this court that yet again put Human rights in the for front. And yes it was legal in the rest of the UK to be gay...

Or how about the Murry case.. here it actually ruled the same way as the UK legal system.. go figure!.. so much for the evil European court, and yes it was in a case of terrorism.

Like it or not, it has been this court that has defended the basic freedoms in the UK and around Europe.. including Turkey (who funny enough has signed on to this also as one of its founding members).

This court has been around for 60 years and doing the same thing as the US supreme court when it comes to human rights (as stated in the treaty).
 
So you are saying that the policies of Maggie Thatcher and other PMs against the catholic people of Northern Ireland during the troubles was some how justified? They are after all citizens of the UK but had less rights than some one like me visiting the UK for a week.....

What the hell are you on about? I dont care what citizenship they withhold, if they are terrorists and intend to harm our nation and they have some useful intel we could use to save many lives, torture is totally appropriate and satisfying for the people who want these pieces of crap to rot and die.
 
Overall, the nations of Europe have the worst history of human rights in the world.

Thats a total exaggeration. Youve seemly forgotten the Middle East, and Africa.

The UK ought to reclaim it's sovereignty and free itself from the Euros.

Nice to know our American friends are aware of our situation.

By the way PeteEU, im not really against the European court of Human rights (oh wait let me rephrase that, the European court for European rights - you know, it being all hypocritical and all) to get involved when our government abuses our human rights and none of the inner powers have the ability to stand up against the government (if it wasnt for the Euro Court the DNA database most likely would have passed), but when it comes to intervening on our daily economic and political lives in Britain, well, thats not on.
 
By the way PeteEU, im not really against the European court of Human rights (oh wait let me rephrase that, the European court for European rights - you know, it being all hypocritical and all) to get involved when our government abuses our human rights and none of the inner powers have the ability to stand up against the government (if it wasnt for the Euro Court the DNA database most likely would have passed), but when it comes to intervening on our daily economic and political lives in Britain, well, thats not on.

Well you see, the only way the court can get involved is if one of YOUR citizens complains to it. The court never butts into the UK daily economic or political lives, but it does call judgement according to the convention if someone from the UK complains to them (or another country does it, but that is very rare).

While you seem to advocate the use of torture, the UK has publicly and officially stated time and time again they dont. On top of that they put it into the treaty that they wrote.. you know the Human rights treaty..

As for my statement about Northern Ireland.. it is kinda funny because in many cases the court actually ruled in favour of the UK, with a few very important exceptions. For one, the UK was ruled in the wrong from denying terror suspects access to a lawyers, plus using excessive force while in custody (aka torture).

But one thing that is universal.. torture is not an acceptable thing for countries that have signed the treaty and guess what... the UK agrees... and has agreed for 60 years as it was one of the important points in the treaty.

I also find it very funny that you are up in arms over this court having jurisdiction over this case (which it has had for 60 years) and yet you are hoping the extradition case goes to the very same court because you disagree with the UK governments view... cant have it both ways sorry.. Either you are for the court and what it can do regardless of the case or you are not for the court and the principle of the court. Any thing else is mob rule.

And why blame the court for doing its job in accordance to a treaty written in a large part and promoted in a huge part by.... the UK 60 years ago?. A bit late to call loss of sovereignty 60 years after the fact just because you dont like a terrorist being able to appeal to the court.. something "terrorists" have done it before (IRA, ETA) and won and lost...
 
Well you see, the only way the court can get involved is if one of YOUR citizens complains to it. The court never butts into the UK daily economic or political lives, but it does call judgement according to the convention if someone from the UK complains to them (or another country does it, but that is very rare).

I know this and i know it doesnt, im just saying generally when Europe puts its hands in our affairs when its not called for, its not on. I know the court doesnt and cannot do it and im actually quiet supportive of the existance of the European Human Rights Court though i insist it is biased for EU nations when it comes to court rulings.

While you seem to advocate the use of torture, the UK has publicly and officially stated time and time again they dont. On top of that they put it into the treaty that they wrote.. you know the Human rights treaty..

Then they are liars and should be sacked for:

A) Even suggesting they dont support torture against terrorist scum when they should be openly encouraging and advocating it
B) Lying and making labour look even worse

But one thing that is universal.. torture is not an acceptable thing for countries that have signed the treaty and guess what... the UK agrees... and has agreed for 60 years as it was one of the important points in the treaty.

Which is stupid, i think us Britons have a tendency of signing things without reading what we are signing, hence us being in the EU and many other annoying little things.

I also find it very funny that you are up in arms over this court having jurisdiction over this case (which it has had for 60 years) and yet you are hoping the extradition case goes to the very same court because you disagree with the UK governments view... cant have it both ways sorry.. Either you are for the court and what it can do regardless of the case or you are not for the court and the principle of the court. Any thing else is mob rule.

Im not, at all. If we promised not to torture by signing an agreement which we shouldnt have, yet we torture, thats our own wrong doing.
 
Last edited:
I'm amused by this 'giving up our Britishness' bull****. If we were entirely sovereign we'd be screwed. Do you know how many dodgy British acts go through the ECJ? Even still do you know how GLOBALISED the world is now? How many of us are actually purely British? We're all mongrels. Britishness. What the hell is 'Britishness'? Give me a break.
 
Thats a total exaggeration. Youve seemly forgotten the Middle East, and Africa.




I don't think there are nations in either Africa, or Asia that can matche the butchery of the Europeans, unless you know of some event in either place that can surpass the killings done by Stalin and Hitler. Do you?
 
I don't think there are nations in either Africa, or Asia that can matche the butchery of the Europeans, unless you know of some event in either place that can surpass the killings done by Stalin and Hitler. Do you?

Ha. Add up all the genocides since World War 2 commited in Africa and all the killings in the Middle East and the ME genocides, and youve got Hitler looking as diplomatic as Ban Ki Moon.
 
Ha. Add up all the genocides since World War 2 commited in Africa and all the killings in the Middle East and the ME genocides, and youve got Hitler looking as diplomatic as Ban Ki Moon.

Go ahead. Add them up and let's see what you get. If you come up with 30 million, then I'll admit that they are worse than Stalin. Cool?
 
Go ahead. Add them up and let's see what you get. If you come up with 30 million, then I'll admit that they are worse than Stalin. Cool?

Oh wow this is amusing. Youve managed to pin all of Europe as the worst in the world based on the actions of 2 nations almost 100 years ago. Good going smart arse, let me go back in time and add up every mofo Salahdin killed and add it to the ME death toll then.
 
Oh wow this is amusing. Youve managed to pin all of Europe as the worst in the world based on the actions of 2 nations almost 100 years ago. Good going smart arse, let me go back in time and add up every mofo Salahdin killed and add it to the ME death toll then.

Oh, that's not enough? Well, let's see, there's Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Chechoslavakia, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chetchnya, you want me to keep going?
 
Overall, the nations of Europe have the worst history of human rights in the world.

So what you are saying is, because of our bad history of human rights, we shouldnt try to make it right today?:doh
 
Oh, that's not enough? Well, let's see, there's Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Chechoslavakia, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chetchnya, you want me to keep going?

Please do. Not much you can do to make the Africans and Arabs look good anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom