In one of the most extensive studies of counter-terrorism and human rights yet undertaken, an independent panel of eminent judges and lawyers today presents alarming findings about the impact of counter-terrorism policies worldwide and calls for remedial action. The Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights, established by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), has based its report “Assessing Damage, Urging Action” on sixteen hearings covering more than forty countries in all regions of the world.

“In the course of this inquiry, we have been shocked by the extent of the damage done over the past seven years by excessive or abusive counter-terrorism measures in a wide range of countries around the world. Many governments, ignoring the lessons of history, have allowed themselves to be rushed into hasty responses to terrorism that have undermined cherished values and violated human rights. The result is a serious threat to the integrity of the international human rights legal framework,” said Justice Arthur Chaskalson, the Chair of the Panel, former Chief Justice of South Africa and first President of the South African Constitutional Court.

The report illustrates the consequences of notorious counter-terrorism practices such as torture, disappearances, arbitrary and secret detention, unfair trials, and persistent impunity for gross human rights violations in many parts of the world. The Panel warns of the danger that exceptional “temporary” counter-terrorism measures are becoming permanent features of law and practice, including in democratic societies. The Panel urges that the present political climate may provide one of the last chances for a concerted international effort to take remedial measures and restore long-standing international norms. The change in US administration provides a unique opportunity for change.

“Seven years after 9/11 it is time to take stock and to repeal abusive laws and policies enacted in recent years. Human rights and international humanitarian law provide a strong and flexible framework to address terrorist threats,” said Mary Robinson, former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, former President of Ireland and current President of the ICJ. “It is now absolutely essential that all states restore their commitment to human rights and that the United Nations takes on a leadership role in this process. If we fail to act now, the damage to international law risks becoming permanent”, she added.

The report calls for the rejection of the “war on terror” paradigm and for a full repudiation of the policies grounded in it. It emphasises that criminal justice systems, not secret intelligence, should be at the heart of the legal response to terrorism.

“We have seen intelligence services around the world acting with insufficient accountability and intelligence cooperation being undertaken outside the rule of law,” said Hina Jilani, lawyer of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and former UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders. “This intelligence is then used in various legal proceedings and cannot be contested. Secrecy is becoming a pervasive feature in our legal systems.”

Though evidence of the deleterious effects of security measures has been well-documented in recent years, this is the first investigation to piece together a picture that draws on public and private hearings covering forty countries over a period of three years. As panellists listened to testimonies from government officials, victims of terrorism, rendition survivors and civil society groups in dozens of countries around the world, a consistent theme emerged: legal systems put in place after World War II were well-equipped to handle current terror threats.

The Panel calls on policymakers to rely on civilian legal systems, utilize criminal courts and not resort to ad-hoc tribunals or military courts to try terror suspects. The report repeatedly remarks upon the extent to which undemocratic regimes with deplorable human rights records have referred to counter-terror practices of countries like the US to justify their own abusive policies. Welcoming the report of this independent group, Wilder Tayler, Acting Secretary General of the ICJ called on States to seek guidance from the recommendations of this authoritative report and to urgently move from rhetorical to real acceptance of human rights.

The Panel holds the global launch of the report in Geneva on 16 February. The reports findings are also presented in Bangkok on 16 February. Subsequent presentations will be held in London on 17 February, and Washington D.C. on 27 February 2009.

The members of the Eminent Jurists Panel:

Justice Arthur Chaskalson (South Africa), former Chief Justice of South Africa, first President of South Africa’s Constitutional Court and Chair of the Eminent Jurists Panel;

Professor Georges Abi-Saab (Egypt), Emeritus Professor of International Law at Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, former judge at the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and member of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body;

Professor Robert K. Goldman (USA), Professor of Law at the American University in Washington D.C. former President of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and former Independent Expert of the United National Commission on Human Rights on counter-terrorism and human rights;

Ms. Hina Jilani (Pakistan), lawyer of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and former UN Special Representative of the Secretary General on the situation of human rights defenders;

Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn (Thailand), Professor of Law at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok and UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in North Korea;

Ms. Mary Robinson (Ireland), former President of Ireland, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and ICJ President;

Professor Stefan Trechsel (Switzerland), judge ad litem at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, former President of the European Commission on Human Rights and Emeritus Professor of Law at University of Zurich;

Justice Raúl Zaffaroni (Argentina), Judge of the Supreme Court of Argentina, Emeritus Professor at the University of Buenos Aires and former Director of the UN’s Latin American Institute for the Protection of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders.

Countries and regions covered by the investigation:

Australia, Canada, Colombia, East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda), the European Union and its member states, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Middle East (Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Yemen), North Africa (Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia), Pakistan, the Russian Federation, South Asia (Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka), South-East Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand), the Southern Cone countries of Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay) on lessons from the past, the UK (London and Belfast) and the United States.

A copy of the executive summary and of the report can be viewed at www.icj.org.

Journalist Anastasia Baburova and human rights lawyer Stanislav Markelov were shot dead on 19 January while having a conversation outside a Moscow metro station. Mr. Markelov, who had just given a press conference, is believed to have been the target of the attack. Ms. Baburova worked for Novaya Gazeta, the same newspaper as investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya, who was assassinated in 2006.

Also slain in Russia recently was Shafiq Amrakhov, owner and editor of the online regional news agency RIA 51 in Murmansk in the country’s north-west. He was shot inside his apartment and died six days later.

“These killings represent a tragic blow to the basic human right of freedom of expression and to all other human rights, which are essential if good governance and the rule of law are to be upheld,” said UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura.

On 16 January, Orel Sambrano, editor of ABC a weekly magazine, was shot and killed in broad daylight as he got out of his car in Valencia, a city in north-central Venezuela.

The 62-year-old, who was also the vice-president of the privately-owned Radio America 890AM station and a columnist for the regional daily Notitarde, had received death threats linked to his reports on drug trafficking.

The “deliberate targeting” of media professionals such as Mr. Sambrano is a setback to “democracy and rule of law which depend on the ability of the members of any society to hold free debates about issues of general concern and make informed decisions,” said Mr. Matsuura.

BBC Director-General Mark Thompson and Deputy Director-General and Head of BBC Journalism Mark Byford today sent an email to all BBC staff following the death of two journalists who worked for the BBC.

The email reads:

“You may well have heard the shocking and sad news that two journalists who worked for the BBC were killed at the weekend in separate incidents.

“On Saturday, Nasteh Dahir Faraah, who worked for the BBC Somali Service and news agencies, was shot dead in the southern Somali city of Kismayo.

“Yesterday, Sunday, Abdul Samad Rohani, BBC Pashto reporter and fixer of the BBC’s News bureau in Kabul in the southern Helmand Province in Afghanistan, was abducted and then shot dead.

“Our thoughts and prayers are with both their families at this terrible time.

“The killings are a stark reminder of the courage and commitment shown by those who work for the BBC’s journalism around the world and especially those who work in the most dangerous and difficult areas in order to report for our audiences.

“At 1200 BST midday today, we would ask everyone who works across BBC Journalism, where they can, to hold a minute’s silence in remembrance and solidarity with our two colleagues and their families.

“Of course, others across the BBC, who may want to also demonstrate this act of support and respect, are encouraged to do so.

“Clearly, as well as with the families, our thoughts today are also with their devastated colleagues in the BBC’s Somali and Pashto services and the BBC’s Newsgathering team in Kabul. We’ve got teams on the ground in both countries doing everything they can to help.”

They say that Northern Command knew about the Enniskillen bombing in advance and did nothing to stop it. Eleven civilians died and not a single member of the security forces.

In the course of making Age Of Terror – 10 Days Of Terror (Tuesday 22 April, 9.00pm, BBC Two) award-winning journalist Peter Taylor carried out an interview with Detective Chief Superintendent Norman Baxter who led the investigation into the Enniskillen bombing.

DCS Baxter revealed the Enniskillen attack was not an unauthorised, one-off operation by a local IRA unit, but was carefully coordinated by three IRA units – two from the South and one from the North. He says that prior to the bombing there were deliberations at a very senior level within the IRA.

“The calculation was taken as to the number of casualties they could inflict on the civilian population against the number of casualties they could inflict on members of the security forces. And they decided that the risk was worth taking,” he said.

“The civilians were collateral to the bomb but they were prepared to accept the number of casualties.”

DCS Baxter also revealed that the IRA planned a simultaneous attack on a Boys’ and Girls’ Brigade parade at the border village of Tullyhommon a few miles away but the bomb failed to go off.

What’s more, British and Irish intelligence sources told Peter Taylor that Martin McGuinness, who is now Northern Ireland ‘s deputy First Minister, was the leading figure on Northern Command at the time.

Intelligence reports indicate three days before the attack McGuinness was stopped by Irish police on the Donegal border. Three southern members of the IRA were in the car with him. The subsequent intelligence assessment was that McGuinness was going to be briefed on the Remembrance Day attacks.

In the hours after the Sunday bombing, the reports record McGuinness leaving Belfast to travel to Fermanagh to meet members of the local IRA to find out what went wrong.

Intelligence reports further indicate that on Monday, the day after the bombing, McGuinness crossed the border to see the officer commanding the IRA’s Donegal unit – and that subsequently Gerry Adams and a senior figure from the IRA’s General Headquarters’ Staff discussed declaring an IRA ceasefire at the beginning of December.

Adams and McGuinness are reported to have fallen out over the proposal with McGuinness saying that on no account should the IRA go for a ceasefire.

Peter Taylor asked Martin McGuinness if he was on Northern Command at the time and had advance knowledge of Enniskillen. He said he was not and knew nothing about the attack. He did not deny going down to Fermanagh after the bombing but implied that it would have been in his Sinn Fein capacity. He declined to be interviewed.

Significantly, many of those who were victims of the bombing now praise the journey McGuinness has made from “war” to peace.

Joan Wilson, whose daughter Marie died in the attack, said: “I regard him as a good politician.

“I’m sure he has to learn a lot. We all learn from experience. But it was a big step for him too and I wish him well.”

Stephen Gault saw his father lying dead in the rubble has now reluctantly come to terms with McGuinness’s transformation.

“It’s hard to stomach him being the deputy first minister, but I think having peace in Northern Ireland is the best thing that ever happened.

“It’s a hard pill to swallow, but I’d rather be where we are now than back in the Troubles.”

In this, the second programme in his chronicle of the Age Of Terror, Peter Taylor looks at the dramatic events of 10 Days Of Terror, in 1987.

A cargo of Libyan arms bound for Ireland is intercepted in French waters and, in the same week, IRA plans to bomb a Remembrance Day service in the border town of Enniskillen are approaching completion.

These two extraordinary events would lead to a transformation of the political landscape in Northern Ireland.

While meeting the dictates of the law, I want to make it clear that this declassification was neither my choice nor my preference. Two Directors of National Intelligence have supported the agency’s position against release.

The long, grueling fight against terrorism, which depends in very real part on the quality of our intelligence, demands that we keep our focus on the present and the future. We must draw lessons from our past—and we have—without becoming captive to it. I thought the release of this report would distract officers serving their country on the frontlines of a global conflict. It will, at a minimum, consume time and attention revisiting ground that is already well plowed. I also remain deeply concerned about the chilling effect that may follow publication of the previously classified work, findings, and recommendations of the Office of Inspector General. The important work of that unit depends on candor and confidentiality.

In keeping with the letter and spirit of the law, CIA has in its declassification process removed relatively little from the report’s executive summary. We focused chiefly on the protection of essential sources and methods. I also thought it unnecessary and unwise to permit identification of officers below the level of Center Chief, even if only by title, and those passages have been deleted, as well.

There is some background that I believe you need to know. In 2002, the Joint Inquiry Committee of Congress instructed our Office of Inspector General to determine if any agency officers should be rewarded for outstanding service in the run-up to 9/11 or held accountable for the unsatisfactory discharge of their duties. In June 2005, the Inspector General presented my predecessor, Porter Goss, with a final report answering that specific mandate. The summary, like the complete report, is a very human document. In it, one group of agency officers—dedicated to their task—looks back to examine and judge the actions of another group of agency officers—dedicated to their task, the task of understanding and combating al-Qai’da.

You should also know that there are very different perspectives on this report. It was important for us to conduct our own review—that is something on which most, if not all of us, can agree. But our colleagues referred to in the document, and others who have read it, took strong exception to its focus, methodology, and conclusions. In October 2005, Director Goss declined to accept its primary recommendation—the creation of an Accountability Board to consider disciplinary action against a handful of individuals at different levels of command. I have re-read the report, carefully evaluated what it says, and have found no reason to revisit his decision.

Director Goss noted at the time that the officers cited include some of our finest. With inadequate resources, they and those they led worked flat out against a tough, secretive foe. As the executive summary points out, there was never a question of misconduct. While they, and our government as a whole, were unable despite their best efforts to shield our nation from attack, their skill, wisdom, energy, and leadership were key elements in the agency’s victories over al-Qai’da before and after 9/11. They have made powerful contributions to our national security. They have prevented other acts of terrorism, and they have saved innocent lives, in our country and overseas.

This is not about avoiding responsibility. In fact, the opposite is true. CIA has for years spoken publicly, openly, and explicitly about shortcomings in its counter-terror programs before 9/11. Those shortcomings have been the subject of hearings, studies, panels, press reports, books, and critiques of all kinds, some fair, some not. As you will see, the Inspector General found no “silver bullet” that would have prevented the terror attacks of September 11^th. There was, in the words of the summary, “no single point of failure.”

Nor did CIA wait for this formal review to begin identifying and correcting the systemic flaws discussed in the report. This is an organization that is self-aware, self-critical, and, to a great degree, self-improving. The Inspector General’s report, like others before it, found areas in which CIA could do better, and, in the intervening years, we have worked hard to do just that.

Counter-terrorism is an exceptionally difficult challenge. The risks, and the stakes, are extremely high. The enemy is adaptive, resilient, and determined to strike us again here at home. There are limits to what intelligence can accomplish, and there can be no guarantee of perfect security. But the talented, motivated officers who work against this threat day and night give our nation a strong advantage. Together, we recognize that the finest tribute we can pay to the victims of terrorism is a redoubled effort to rip that scourge out by the roots. We can, and should, be proud of the many great things CIA has done, and will do, to defend the United States in a very dangerous world.

Mike Hayden

To access the declassified Executive Summary of the Office of Inspector General report, click here. [PDF Only 989KB*]

(Alan Turnbull has run the very important site, Secret Bases, which is “the end-result of countless hours of research by Alan Turnbull, a man for whom the words “out of bounds” don’t really mean too much.

Dotted all over the UK are hundreds of secret Government and military installations. Some of them are quite obvious – MI6’s Vauxhall HQ for instance – but other’s you’d never know were there.” – quoted from Pocket Lint – Website of the Day)

Alan Turnbull (www.secret-bases.co.uk) writes:

I hope you can publish this urgently:-

UK Secret Bases website is deleted by host company Virgin Media (formerly NTL)

I started experiencing intermittent access problems on Monday 6th August 2007 and assumed just a temporary local network fault.

However, a regular reader emailed me today reporting same.

I complained to Virgin Media technical helpdesk tonight, Tuesday 7th August 2007 at 10pm and they then promptly deleted my whole webspace!

NTL hosted my webspace with no problems since August 2003.

Virgin Media acquired NTL only a matter of months ago in 2007.

More to follow …

I have a full backup and will act accordingly very soon.

Would appreciate you publicising worldwide ASAP.

Regards,

Alan Turnbull