British Government Ignores Suffering of Victims of Saudi Torture
A House of Lords ruling that three British men and a Canadian who were tortured in Saudi Arabia cannot sue the men responsible for their ordeal has been criticised by the Medical Foundation, which accuses the British government of ignoring the suffering of its own citizens while backing the servants of a state that routinely uses torture.
The men, Sandy Mitchell, Les Walker, Ron Jones and Canadian William Sampson were arrested in Saudi Arabia several years ago and brutalised into making bogus confessions linking them to a series of bomb explosions allegedly connected to an illicit alcohol trade.
The torture they suffered included beatings, often while being hung in contorted positions, sleep deprivation and being forcibly fed mind-altering drugs. One of the men was also raped. Two were sentenced to death and two received lengthy prison sentences before they were all granted "clemency” by the Saudi king.
A Court of Appeal ruling in 2004 that the men could sue their torturers was hailed at the time as putting an end to immunity for torturers abroad. But Saudi Arabia, with the backing of the British government, argued that officials were protected by the State Immunity Act 1978 from proceedings brought in the English courts.
That position was upheld by the Law Lords, who said that a principle of international law was that one sovereign state could not assert its judicial authority over another, and held that state immunity extends to individuals.
The Medical Foundation was an expert witness in the case, having examined and reported on the injuries of two of the men. After the ruling, MF chief executive Simon Carruth said: "Nationality carries with it a right to state protection. Instead, the Government is ignoring the suffering of its own citizens to back the servants of a state that routinely uses torture.
"This is against the spirit of the UN Convention Against Torture. The convention makes no mention of civil liability but clearly imposes on states a duty to prevent and punish acts of torture, wherever they occur.
"Saudi Arabia is party to the convention, which it conspicuously fails to uphold. Compensation would have had a punitive and deterrent effect. In ignoring that fact and backing the Saudi position, the British government has sacrificed the moral rights of its citizens and missed an opportunity to bring pressure to bear on a state guilty of human rights abuses.”
The case will now go to the European Court of Human Rights.
Click Here to read "Saudi 'torture' victims lose their right to sue". The Times. June 15 2006
Click Here to read: "Four Britons denied right to sue Saudis for 'torture' over bombs". Daily Telegraph. June 15. 2006
Click Here to read: "Saudi 'torture' Britons lose case". BBC Online. June 15 2006
