ECHR rejects hooded men torture case.

Wascurito

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
7,298
The European Court of Human Rights has turned down a request by Ireland to declared that the so-called 'hooded men' detained by the UK suffered torture. This is despite their being subjected to various techniques of ill-treatment including, hooding, stress positions, white noise, sleep deprivation and deprivation of food and water - along with beatings and death threats.

The court handed down its judgment this morning on whether or not the way in which the 14 men (who were interned in Northern Ireland in 1971) were treated amounted to torture.

RTÉ News: European court rejects 'hooded men' torture claims
 


NMunsterman

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
6,074
The European Court of Human Rights has turned down a request by Ireland to declared that the so-called 'hooded men' detained by the UK suffered torture. This is despite their being subjected to various techniques of ill-treatment including, hooding, stress positions, white noise, sleep deprivation and deprivation of food and water - along with beatings and death threats.

The court handed down its judgment this morning on whether or not the way in which the 14 men (who were interned in Northern Ireland in 1971) were treated amounted to torture.

RTÉ News: European court rejects 'hooded men' torture claims
In spite of the fact that the British themselves actually admitted using torture :

It includes a letter dated 1977 from then-home secretary Merlyn Rees to then-prime minister James Callaghan in which he states his view that the decision to use "methods of torture in Northern Ireland in 1971/72 was taken by ministers - in particular Lord Carrington, then secretary of state for defence".

Mr Rees added that "a political decision was taken".

This decision by the ECHR does not seem to accept the British acknowledgement that they tortured people in the North.
 

Wascurito

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
7,298
In spite of the fact that the British themselves actually admitted using torture :

It includes a letter dated 1977 from then-home secretary Merlyn Rees to then-prime minister James Callaghan in which he states his view that the decision to use "methods of torture in Northern Ireland in 1971/72 was taken by ministers - in particular Lord Carrington, then secretary of state for defence".

Mr Rees added that "a political decision was taken".

This decision by the ECHR does not seem to accept the British acknowledgement that they tortured people in the North.
It'll be interesting to see the text of the judgment. I can think of a number of dodgy regimes who will take great comfort from the verdict.
 

Just Jack

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,739
Has the ECHR gone rouge?

Might be a take over by the far-right.
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861
The European Court of Human Rights has turned down a request by Ireland to declared that the so-called 'hooded men' detained by the UK suffered torture. This is despite their being subjected to various techniques of ill-treatment including, hooding, stress positions, white noise, sleep deprivation and deprivation of food and water - along with beatings and death threats.

The court handed down its judgment this morning on whether or not the way in which the 14 men (who were interned in Northern Ireland in 1971) were treated amounted to torture.

RTÉ News: European court rejects 'hooded men' torture claims
I haven't been following the case very closely, but it seems bizarre that they'd not find it torture.
 

Wascurito

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
7,298
I haven't been following the case very closely, but it seems bizarre that they'd not find it torture.
A lot seems to hang on the original verdict in 1978 and the idea that not sufficient evidence had been presented to overturn it.
https://twitter.com/ShoaibMKhan/status/976033849800036354

There was one dissenting opinion:
https://twitter.com/Kartik__Raj/status/976032958137208832

Full judgment is here:
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{"itemid":["001-181585"]}
 

CookieMonster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
33,861

PBP voter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
9,242

*EPIC SUCCESS*

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
3,087
I haven't been following the case very closely, but it seems bizarre that they'd not find it torture.
Its quite disturbing that they didn't.

What is to stop another state doing similar and pointing to this ruling?

Sadly, because its 'The North' many are happy to just turn away, but its pretty grim reading.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Its quite disturbing that they didn't.

What is to stop another state doing similar and pointing to this ruling?

Sadly, because its 'The North' many are happy to just turn away, but its pretty grim reading.
The original decision by the ECtHR was used by the US to justify the abuse of prisoners as part of the ‘war on terror’.
 

LookWhoItIs

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
1,702
I'm just shocked that crown forces would have resorted to such tactics - surely it was the pressure they were underpetunia
 

davidcameron

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
8,785
The decision to introduce internment in Northern Ireland in 1971.

The idea for internment came from the Stormont government but the decision to let it take place was made in London.

I thought Brian Faulkner was a moderate Unionist - considering he described Ian Paisley (senior) as "the demon doctor".
So how did Faulkner make such a blunder?
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,564
Twitter
No

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,564
Twitter
No
The European Court of Human Rights has turned down a request by Ireland to declared that the so-called 'hooded men' detained by the UK suffered torture. This is despite their being subjected to various techniques of ill-treatment including, hooding, stress positions, white noise, sleep deprivation and deprivation of food and water - along with beatings and death threats.
//

A horrible case in every way.

But using the archives cleverly to re-launch a case after 40 years probably had some of the judges thinking - what if a few cases from the 1940s or 1980s in the eastern bloc came before us? Best to draw a line somewhere.
 

Catalpast

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
25,564
The idea for internment came from the Stormont government but the decision to let it take place was made in London.

I thought Brian Faulkner was a moderate Unionist - considering he described Ian Paisley (senior) as "the demon doctor".
So how did Faulkner make such a blunder?
Faulkner was seen as a Hardliner

- that's how he got elected in the 1st place.

Only someone like Paisley could make him look like a 'Moderate'!
 

PAGE61

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2018
Messages
1,171
It does not say much for Justice. I know some have commented that 40y year case should be in the past,but they initially took the case in the 1970s. The British were not forthcoming with evidence and on many an occasion either refused or had to be brought to court to get them to hand it over. It is also worth noting that none of the men were ever charged with anything in relation to what they were interred for. Shocking stuff.They were beaten ,made walk down a line of squaddies who had dogs and clubs to bash them . made walk over broken glass barefoot, took up in a helicopter and told to say their prayers as they were thrown out only to find they were hovering just off the ground. Possibly given acid or something to disorientate them. Sleep deprivation ,temp deprivation .Standing till dropped and white noise at an incredible volume ....
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top