This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
"This applies to the UK as it does to the US - as the authors state plainly that:
seemingly innocuous acts (e.g. allowing refueling at airports of aircraft of another State) can become wrongful under international law if those acts facilitate Extraordinary Rendition."
Besides being illegal, "the moral case is unassailable: there is simply no justification whatsoever for the UK or the US engaging in torture, whether by direct or indirect means." Nor can it provide reliable information or combat terrorism. Yet the practice continues unabated.
In November 2009, APPG published its "legal proposals to criminalise UK involvement in extraordinary rendition" in a report titled, "Extraordinary Rendition: Closing the Gap."
It called the practice "illegal, immoral, a stark breach of the rule of law and ineffective as a counterterrorism tool." It's unaddressed sufficiently in British law, so it called for "effective legislation to ensure that the UK does not facilitate or support such a practice now or in the future."
It stated that:
-- evidence shows that extraordinary rendition is longstanding, but more frequent during America's War on Terror;
-- it expressed great concern about Britain's involvement; clear evidence shows it, but "no prosecutions have taken place to date;"
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
