Iran, the UK, and torture

Is there any connection between the violent suppression of protests in Iran on Wednesday and the news revealed on the same day that the Labour government had allegedly tried to silence those local authority leaders from within its own party on the issue of long term care of the elderly in England? You might argue that there is very little that can be compared between these two incidents and you may well be correct.

The situation in Iran is very different to the situation here in the UK. The results of the recently held elections were contested by the opposition and the current government of President Ahmadinejad has very little in terms of democratic legitimacy. Despite continuing street protests he is not willing to listen to his people and is prepared to use force to ensure his position. That force can be seen used by thugs on motorcycles chasing protestors and beating them up on the street and also by the courts as they decide that some of the leaders of the movement for democracy are to be hanged for their ‘crimes’.

We do not see such scenes in the UK. Here we have a legitimate government that is within weeks of facing an open and fair election which it may or may not win. If, against al the odds, it does win we will not see the opposition crying foul and there will be no need for street protests because we will all know that the whole process was fair and just. Should there be demonstrations we also know that in the main the police will treat those people well. Despite the odd incident we have confidence in the way the police service conducts its work.

But we cannot ignore the story reported in the Times on Wednesday that a number of local authority leaders were ‘put under pressure’ to withdraw their objections to the government’s plans for care of the elderly. As you would expect objections were raised by both Conservative and Lib Dem run councils that the cost would be too great, especially at a time of severe financial constraints. More surprising was the number of Labour councils also sharing this view. A letter signed by councillors of all three parties containing these objections was sent to the Times for publication. Somehow the leader of the Labour group on the Local Government Association received news of the letter before its publication and contacted five Labour councillors asking that they withdraw their names. Denying that ministers had asked him to do this, he did confirm that it is usual for government special advisors to contact him. So would it be fair to conclude that pressure from within the Labour government was applied to their local council colleagues to ensure their silence? There was no physical force; no one was beaten up or locked up. But it seems that an attempt was made to silence free speech.

Still, you say – the difference between the two countries is great. And on the above evidence you would be correct. But then we would have to consider another story that has emerged this week about the role of our security services in colluding with the US’s use of torture in third party countries. The highest judge in the UK, the aptly named Lord Judge, said that ‘the UK authorities had been involved in and facilitated the ill treatment and torture to which he [Binyam Mohamed] was subjected’. MI5 does come out well in this story. It is being accused not just of one incident of collusion but of many. The question that now has to be answered is ‘did any UK government minister know that this was happening?’ For if they did then the gap between Iran and the UK is closer than we would think.

Last night the excellent Michael Crick had a short film on BBC4 on the work of the Home Office over the years. In an old interview with Merlyn Rees, a Labour Home Secretary in the 1970’s, it was claimed that ministers knew very little of what went on in MI5. But in the same programme all recent Home Secretaries – of the Blair and Brown eras – insisted that they had full knowledge of its workings. Now this film was produced before the current MI5 activities came to light – so the above question was not put. But since they were so insistent that they were not in dark what conclusions should we draw?

One of Christianity’s foundational beliefs is that all human beings are created in the image of God. Despite that image being severely damaged we also believe that it is redeemable in all through the death and resurrection of Jesus. And it is this core doctrine that should determine which side of the debate on torture we find ourselves. In other words, I can only but feel deeply saddened that my government has allowed such a thing to occur. It is a stain on our country.