Lawyers for Rangzieb Ahmed, who had fingernails torn out during questioning, say British complicity was so great his conviction should be quashed
A convicted Islamist terrorist who had fingernails ripped out after British intelligence officers and detectives drew up a list of questions for his Pakistani interrogators won the right to appeal against his conviction today.
Lawyers for Rangzieb Ahmed argued that British complicity in his unlawful detention and torture by Inter Services Intelligence in Pakistan was so great his conviction should be overturned.
The decision to grant Ahmed leave to appeal comes at a time when the government is finalising the terms of an inquiry to be held into allegations of British collusion in overseas torture.
At a full hearing, Ahmed's lawyers are expected to argue that the UK's complicity in his torture was so abhorrent that he should never have been put on trial.
Among the documents submitted to the appeal court before today's hearing was the transcript of a statement made in the Commons last year by David Davis, the former shadow home secretary. This detailed the way officers of both MI5 and MI6, and detectives from Greater Manchester police are alleged to have orchestrated the events that led to Ahmed being detained in Pakistan.
Davis told MPs that Ahmed was allowed to fly from Manchester to Pakistan after the evidence upon which he was subsequently convicted had been gathered.
The Pakistani authorities were tipped off and British intelligence agencies suggested that their Pakistani counterparts detain him, in full knowledge of "the normal methods" that were employed against terrorism suspects.
"Suggesting arrest was equivalent to suggesting torture," he told the Commons, adding: "The authorities know full well that this story is an evidential showcase for the policy of complicity in torture, should that evidence ever come out".
After being deported to the UK, Ahmed, 34, from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, was convicted at Manchester crown court in December 2008 of membership of al-Qaida and of directing a terrorist organisation, and admitted membership of a banned organisation, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. He is now serving a life sentence.
The appeal court heard that since his conviction, parliament's joint committee on human rights, and the UN special rapporteur on torture, had both concluded that handing lists of questions to intelligence agencies known to use torture – in the manner that MI5 and Manchester police have admitted – amounted to complicity.
The human rights select committee and the UN watchdog have also condemned the practice of asking those agencies known routinely to use torture to detain suspects, in a manner that Davis alleges happened in the Ahmed case.
Before Ahmed went on trial, the public and media were excluded from court for a number of hearings, at the request of the Crown Prosecution Service. Davis challenged ministers to confirm the truth of his account by looking at the in-camera court recordsJoel Bennathan QC, for Ahmed, said today that the appeal court, having read those transcripts of the in-camera hearings, "will be able to inform itself as to the degree of accuracy or error in that statement made under parliamentary privilege".
Submissions about the use of in-camera procedure were made last week on behalf of six media organisations, including the Guardian, and today Lord Justice Aikens said the court was anxious that as much evidence as possible should be heard in the open. Notwithstanding this, much of the documentary evidence was kept secret, and the court sat in camera for 30 minutes.
The court's written judgment will be published at a later date, after the intelligence agencies have been offered an opportunity to ask for it to be vetted.
