Hussein, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Defence
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE TOMLINSON
- LORD JUSTICE RYDER
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Public International Law
- Human Rights Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case examined whether the 'challenge direct' interrogation policy adopted by the Secretary of State for Defence in May 2012 is lawful under international humanitarian laws. Two grounds were challenged: whether the policy constituted inhumane treatment under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and whether it posed an unacceptable risk of being implemented unlawfully. Initially brought by Mr. Ramzi Saggar Hassan in 2011, Mr. Haidar Ali Hussein succeeded as the claimant. The court upheld the lower court's findings that the policy is lawful and does not breach humane treatment standards, thereby dismissing Hussein's appeal.
Judgment
LORD JUSTICE LLOYD JONES :
This case is now concerned with a policy of the Secretary of State for Defence (“the Secretary of State”) adopted in May 2012 authorising a technique known as challenge direct for use in the interrogation of persons captured by UK forces in situations of armed conflict. The Appellant seeks judicial review of the policy on the ground that, on its face, it is unlawful in that it constitutes inhumane treatment, contrary inter alia to Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, alternatively on the ground that the policy is unlawful because there is an unacceptable risk that it will be exercised in a way that is not lawful having regard to the circumstances in which it may be used.
The proceedings were commenced in September 2011. At that time the challenge was to a questioning technique known as the harsh approach. In May 2012 the Secretary of State replaced the policy authorising the harsh approach with a new policy authorising challenge direct. The proceedings were subsequently amended and have continued as a challenge to the policy authorising challenge direct.
The original claimant in these proceedings was Mr. Ramzi Saggar Hassan, an Iraqi national who had been arrested and questioned by UK forces in Iraq in April 2007. He alleged that while detained he had been ill-treated both physically and by being shouted at for substantial periods of time during questioning. In addition to bringing these proceedings he was a co-claimant in a claim which successfully sought a public inquiry into UK detention policy and practices in Iraq and he also brought proceedings for damages in respect of the ill-treatment which he alleged he had suffered. The private law proceedings were settled.
The present claimant, Mr. Haidar Ali Hussein, was substituted in these proceedings by consent by order made on 12 November 2012. Mr. Hussein is an Iraqi national who was arrested by UK forces in December 2004. He alleges that during his detention he was physically ill-treated both before and during his questioning and was subjected to substantial periods of shouting. He was a co-claimant with Mr. Hassan in the proceedings seeking a public inquiry. He has also made a private law claim for damages in respect of his treatment by UK forces.
The Secretary of State in his Acknowledgement of Service asserted that Mr. Hassan lacked standing to bring these proceedings. When granting permission to apply for judicial review Ouseley J. indicated th