By . David Rose . PUBLISHED: . 16:04 EST, 19 October 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 07:46 EST, 20 October 2013 . The Mail on Sunday has delivered a decisive blow against the creeping new culture of ‘secret justice’ after forcing the disclosure of a classified High Court judgment about torture in Afghanistan. After a ten-month legal battle, we can at last reveal horrifying allegations over the treatment of prisoners captured by British forces in Afghanistan – evidence the Ministry of Defence wanted to keep secret. We can now report that British officials, with the express approval of Labour Foreign Secretary David Miliband, were duped into handing over one particular detainee to the Afghan security service. The newly disclosed judgment reveals how he told that he was beaten with steel rods, whipped with electric cables and deprived of sleep for days – and showed the scars to prove it. Critics of secret justice said the new revelations indicate the MoD resorted to a secret hearing to cover their own embarrassment at handing the detainee over – and not to protect both his own and the UK’s national interest, as they claimed. Crucially, the breakthrough is the first time parts of a formerly secret judgment have been published.Even more significantly, it concerns the very case which inspired the Government to introduce this year’s hugely controversial Justice and Security Act – the law which formally enshrines secret hearings and secret judgments in the legal system, a radical departure from centuries of tradition. Ever since it was first mooted, this newspaper has campaigned to expose the threat to democracy and openness that secret courts represent. The High Court decision last week to allow publication of some  of the secret Afghan prisoner judgment is the first victory in that campaign. The battle began in April 2010. Maya Evans, a peace campaigner, asked the High Court to stop transfers of prisoners captured by British forces to the Afghan security service, the NDS, on the grounds they would be tortured. The court, led by Lord Justice Richards, responded in part with a judgment that was public: It said that transfers to NDS jails in Kandahar and Lashkar Gar in Helmand could continue as long as British forces ‘monitored’ prisoners’ fates. But it added that no more prisoners should be sent to the NDS in Kabul. Critically, the reasons for making this distinction were contained in a second secret judgment. The reasons can only now be published, after the MoS successfully challenged the continuing secrecy. Decision: Lord Justice Richards responded in part with a judgement that was public . We can reveal the secret ruling concerns a supposed Taliban leader, described only as Detainee 806. When . he was held by UK troops in January 2010, there was already a . moratorium banning the transfer of prisoners to the NDS in Kabul, . because its interrogation centre there – codenamed Department 17 – had . gained a sinister reputation for torture and British forces found it . impossible to gain access. The . now-declassified judgment states that Dr Amrullah Saleh, the NDS chief, . persuaded UK officials to hand over Detainee 806, after giving his . personal assurance that he would be cared for humanely and would be . allowed weekly visits from the British. According to a witness statement by a . senior Foreign Office official which also was not disclosed in 2010, the . ultimate decision to comply with Dr Saleh’s request was taken by Labour . Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Armed Forces Minister Bill . Rammell, on the grounds that the prisoner could more easily be . prosecuted in Kabul – so breaching their own moratorium. But as the judgment now reveals, Dr . Saleh’s promises proved worthless. Once in Kabul, Detainee 806 . ‘disappeared’ for a month. When he did finally meet two British Army . personnel, he told them he had been beaten with steel rods about his . legs and feet, punched in the head, torso, arms and testicles, and . deprived of sleep for days. On a subsequent visit, he said he had also been whipped with electric cables. Some of his injuries were photographed. Triumph over secret justice: Mail on Sunday's critical victory . Public concern: Home Secretary David Davis said David Miliband (pictured) 'broke our own moratorium and handed over a prisoner to be tortured' which he says 'is a clear matter of public concern, which using a secret court covered up' 'Far from protecting national security, this was about hiding political embarrassment' says former shadow Home Secretary David Davis (pictured) In 2010, the MoD asked for the evidence and judgment in the case to stay secret to ‘protect national security’ and preserve relations with the Afghan government. They also said disclosure might put prisoners at risk of reprisals. But last night former shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: ‘Far from protecting national security, this was about hiding political embarrassment.’ He added: ‘The fact David Miliband broke our own moratorium and handed over a prisoner to be tortured is a clear matter of public concern, which using a secret court covered up. This is a very bad harbinger for the secret justice procedures which the new Act creates.’ This newspaper’s lawyers, led by Dinah Rose QC, argued that full disclosure was in the public interest. However, parts of the judgment – we do not even know how much – are still secret. The High Court also refused our request to lay down guidelines to ensure future secret judgments are regularly reviewed, to allow publication as soon as possible. An MoD spokeswoman said the ministry was happy that parts of the secret judgment had been disclosed, but added: ‘There are exceptional cases in which closed proceedings are necessary to safeguard national security.’ Neither Mr Miliband nor Mr Rammell responded to MoS requests  for comment. Whipped: An illustration showing how Detainee 806 suffered in Kabul . It must have been a perilous operation: A raid  by British forces on a Taliban stronghold which resulted in the capture of an alleged insurgent leader – the man who would be described as Detainee 806. His true identity remains unknown. What is certain is that by early January 2010, he was a prisoner at the British base Camp Bastion, the sprawling fortress north-west of Lashkar Gar, the capital of Helmand province – the killing field where more than 400 UK service personnel have died. There, his living conditions were civilised, with access to showers and exercise. But British forces cannot legally hold Taliban prisoners indefinitely. If Detainee 806 were not to be freed, he had to be prosecuted under Afghan law. For this there was a well-established routine, starting with the prisoner’s transfer to the Lashkar Gar branch of the NDS, the Afghan Security Service. But instead, says the once-secret High Court judgment which The Mail on Sunday had declassified last week, Detainee 806 was consigned to the NDS in Kabul – despite the fact Britain had officially banned all transfers there since 2008, because of the risk they would be tortured. The decision was ultimately taken by the then Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, and the Armed Forces Minister,  Bill Rammell. This, says the judgment, issued in its secret form in April 2010, followed ‘specific reassurances’ from the NDS chief Amrullah Saleh that ‘[the prisoner] would be treated humanely and that UK officials would be given full access to him.’ 'Reassurances': NDS chief Amrullah Saleh, (pictured here speaking during a gathering in Kabul) said the prisoner 'would be treated humanely' Dr Saleh was a plausible, highly regarded figure: educated and a contributor to newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal. He was also vehemently anti-Taliban. However, his assurances were bogus. After Detainee 806 was transferred to Kabul on January 15, the judgment goes on, ‘British Embassy staff experienced considerable difficulty with gaining access .  .  . They contacted the NDS on an almost daily basis. It was not possible to visit the detainee until February 14, almost a month after he had been transferred by the UK.’ The judgment adds: ‘The UK’s repeated efforts to secure a visit were blocked by a series of unsatisfactory excuses .  .  . UK officials were given the runaround until questioning of Detainee 806 had been completed, and this was done despite the specific assurances given prior to his transfer.’ When two British Army personnel finally did get to see him, he was being held at Department 17, a notorious NDS interrogation centre – a place Dr Saleh had promised he would not be taken to. He told the officers he had been ‘beaten with steel rods to the area of his legs and feet, causing bruising and bleeding to his toes (he claimed he could not walk or stand after the beating); he had been punched on his face; and his testicles had been punched, grabbed and rubbed .  .  . he had been subjected to sleep deprivation and had been made to stand up for five consecutive nights.’ The NDS, he added, ‘had told him that if he reported any abuse to “the foreigners” he would be beaten or killed.’ The officers took photographs  of his injuries. The following evening Dr Saleh told them Detainee 806’s interrogation had been a great success: He had ‘been very forthcoming, without any pressure from the NDS.’ Two weeks later, the British visited the prisoner again. This time, he said he had been  slapped, punched, and whipped, ‘with what he described as electrical wiring about 24in long.’ The secret judgment said the judges could not determine the prisoner’s credibility. But it added: ‘We consider that the only safe way to proceed is on the assumption that the allegations are true.’ Nevertheless, the judges said in 2010 that there was no good reason to make his claims public: ‘The public interest considerations in favour of non-disclosure ought in our view to prevail.’ The judgment contains details of threats and torture endured by other prisoners, including another man allegedly beaten with cables. All of them, until this newspaper went to court, would have stayed secret indefinitely. ‘The judgment shows the British government knew detainees were being tortured,  yet this information was withheld from the public,’ Richard Stein, the solicitor who represented The Mail on Sunday, said yesterday. ‘We are moving into an era when more and more of our justice system is going to  unfold in secret – and yet there isn’t even a mechanism for ensuring that judgments such  as this eventually enter the  public domain.’ The Ministry of Defence has asked the court to order this newspaper to pay its costs – a  sum which could easily exceed £20,000. We are fighting this demand.
Landmark ruling reveals Government used judges to cover up torture blunder .
We reveal horrifying allegations over treatment of prisoners .
Mail on Sunday has led crusade against sinister new law .
By . David Rose . PUBLISHED: . 16:04 EST, 19 October 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 07:46 EST, 20 October 2013 . The Mail on Sunday has delivered a decisive blow against the creeping new culture of ‘secret justice’ after forcing the disclosure of a classified High Court judgment about torture in Afghanistan. After a ten-month legal battle, we can at last reveal horrifying allegations over the treatment of prisoners captured by British forces in Afghanistan – evidence the Ministry of Defence wanted to keep secret. We can now report that British officials, with the express approval of Labour Foreign Secretary David Miliband, were duped into handing over one particular detainee to the Afghan security service. The newly disclosed judgment reveals how he told that he was beaten with steel rods, whipped with electric cables and deprived of sleep for days – and showed the scars to prove it. Critics of secret justice said the new revelations indicate the MoD resorted to a secret hearing to cover their own embarrassment at handing the detainee over – and not to protect both his own and the UK’s national interest, as they claimed. Crucially, the breakthrough is the first time parts of a formerly secret judgment have been published.Even more significantly, it concerns the very case which inspired the Government to introduce this year’s hugely controversial Justice and Security Act – the law which formally enshrines secret hearings and secret judgments in the legal system, a radical departure from centuries of tradition. Ever since it was first mooted, this newspaper has campaigned to expose the threat to democracy and openness that secret courts represent. The High Court decision last week to allow publication of some  of the secret Afghan prisoner judgment is the first victory in that campaign. The battle began in April 2010. Maya Evans, a peace campaigner, asked the High Court to stop transfers of prisoners captured by British forces to the Afghan security service, the NDS, on the grounds they would be tortured. The court, led by Lord Justice Richards, responded in part with a judgment that was public: It said that transfers to NDS jails in Kandahar and Lashkar Gar in Helmand could continue as long as British forces ‘monitored’ prisoners’ fates. But it added that no more prisoners should be sent to the NDS in Kabul. Critically, the reasons for making this distinction were contained in a second secret judgment. The reasons can only now be published, after the MoS successfully challenged the continuing secrecy. Decision: Lord Justice Richards responded in part with a judgement that was public . We can reveal the secret ruling concerns a supposed Taliban leader, described only as Detainee 806. When . he was held by UK troops in January 2010, there was already a . moratorium banning the transfer of prisoners to the NDS in Kabul, . because its interrogation centre there – codenamed Department 17 – had . gained a sinister reputation for torture and British forces found it . impossible to gain access. The . now-declassified judgment states that Dr Amrullah Saleh, the NDS chief, . persuaded UK officials to hand over Detainee 806, after giving his . personal assurance that he would be cared for humanely and would be . allowed weekly visits from the British. According to a witness statement by a . senior Foreign Office official which also was not disclosed in 2010, the . ultimate decision to comply with Dr Saleh’s request was taken by Labour . Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Armed Forces Minister Bill . Rammell, on the grounds that the prisoner could more easily be . prosecuted in Kabul – so breaching their own moratorium. But as the judgment now reveals, Dr . Saleh’s promises proved worthless. Once in Kabul, Detainee 806 . ‘disappeared’ for a month. When he did finally meet two British Army . personnel, he told them he had been beaten with steel rods about his . legs and feet, punched in the head, torso, arms and testicles, and . deprived of sleep for days. On a subsequent visit, he said he had also been whipped with electric cables. Some of his injuries were photographed. Triumph over secret justice: Mail on Sunday's critical victory . Public concern: Home Secretary David Davis said David Miliband (pictured) 'broke our own moratorium and handed over a prisoner to be tortured' which he says 'is a clear matter of public concern, which using a secret court covered up' 'Far from protecting national security, this was about hiding political embarrassment' says former shadow Home Secretary David Davis (pictured) In 2010, the MoD asked for the evidence and judgment in the case to stay secret to ‘protect national security’ and preserve relations with the Afghan government. They also said disclosure might put prisoners at risk of reprisals. But last night former shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: ‘Far from protecting national security, this was about hiding political embarrassment.’ He added: ‘The fact David Miliband broke our own moratorium and handed over a prisoner to be tortured is a clear matter of public concern, which using a secret court covered up. This is a very bad harbinger for the secret justice procedures which the new Act creates.’ This newspaper’s lawyers, led by Dinah Rose QC, argued that full disclosure was in the public interest. However, parts of the judgment – we do not even know how much – are still secret. The High Court also refused our request to lay down guidelines to ensure future secret judgments are regularly reviewed, to allow publication as soon as possible. An MoD spokeswoman said the ministry was happy that parts of the secret judgment had been disclosed, but added: ‘There are exceptional cases in which closed proceedings are necessary to safeguard national security.’ Neither Mr Miliband nor Mr Rammell responded to MoS requests  for comment. Whipped: An illustration showing how Detainee 806 suffered in Kabul . It must have been a perilous operation: A raid  by British forces on a Taliban stronghold which resulted in the capture of an alleged insurgent leader – the man who would be described as Detainee 806. His true identity remains unknown. What is certain is that by early January 2010, he was a prisoner at the British base Camp Bastion, the sprawling fortress north-west of Lashkar Gar, the capital of Helmand province – the killing field where more than 400 UK service personnel have died. There, his living conditions were civilised, with access to showers and exercise. But British forces cannot legally hold Taliban prisoners indefinitely. If Detainee 806 were not to be freed, he had to be prosecuted under Afghan law. For this there was a well-established routine, starting with the prisoner’s transfer to the Lashkar Gar branch of the NDS, the Afghan Security Service. But instead, says the once-secret High Court judgment which The Mail on Sunday had declassified last week, Detainee 806 was consigned to the NDS in Kabul – despite the fact Britain had officially banned all transfers there since 2008, because of the risk they would be tortured. The decision was ultimately taken by the then Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, and the Armed Forces Minister, Bill Rammell. This, says the judgment, issued in its secret form in April 2010, followed ‘specific reassurances’ from the NDS chief Amrullah Saleh that ‘[the prisoner] would be treated humanely and that UK officials would be given full access to him.’ 'Reassurances': NDS chief Amrullah Saleh, (pictured here speaking during a gathering in Kabul) said the prisoner 'would be treated humanely' Dr Saleh was a plausible, highly regarded figure: educated and a contributor to newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal. He was also vehemently anti-Taliban. However, his assurances were bogus. After Detainee 806 was transferred to Kabul on January 15, the judgment goes on, ‘British Embassy staff experienced considerable difficulty with gaining access .  .  . They contacted the NDS on an almost daily basis. It was not possible to visit the detainee until February 14, almost a month after he had been transferred by the UK.’ The judgment adds: ‘The UK’s repeated efforts to secure a visit were blocked by a series of unsatisfactory excuses .  .  . UK officials were given the runaround until questioning of Detainee 806 had been completed, and this was done despite the specific assurances given prior to his transfer.’ When two British Army personnel finally did get to see him, he was being held at Department 17, a notorious NDS interrogation centre – a place Dr Saleh had promised he would not be taken to. He told the officers he had been ‘beaten with steel rods to the area of his legs and feet, causing bruising and bleeding to his toes (he claimed he could not walk or stand after the beating); he had been punched on his face; and his testicles had been punched, grabbed and rubbed .  .  . he had been subjected to sleep deprivation and had been made to stand up for five consecutive nights.’ The NDS, he added, ‘had told him that if he reported any abuse to “the foreigners” he would be beaten or killed.’ The officers took photographs  of his injuries. The following evening Dr Saleh told them Detainee 806’s interrogation had been a great success: He had ‘been very forthcoming, without any pressure from the NDS.’ Two weeks later, the British visited the prisoner again. This time, he said he had been  slapped, punched, and whipped, ‘with what he described as electrical wiring about 24in long.’ The secret judgment said the judges could not determine the prisoner’s credibility. But it added: ‘We consider that the only safe way to proceed is on the assumption that the allegations are true.’ Nevertheless, the judges said in 2010 that there was no good reason to make his claims public: ‘The public interest considerations in favour of non-disclosure ought in our view to prevail.’ The judgment contains details of threats and torture endured by other prisoners, including another man allegedly beaten with cables. All of them, until this newspaper went to court, would have stayed secret indefinitely. ‘The judgment shows the British government knew detainees were being tortured,  yet this information was withheld from the public,’ Richard Stein, the solicitor who represented The Mail on Sunday, said yesterday. ‘We are moving into an era when more and more of our justice system is going to  unfold in secret – and yet there isn’t even a mechanism for ensuring that judgments such  as this eventually enter the public domain.’ The Ministry of Defence has asked the court to order this newspaper to pay its costs – a  sum which could easily exceed £20,000. We are fighting this demand.
October 2013 . The Mail on Sunday has delivered a can at last reveal horrifying allegations over the treatment of prisoners captured by British resorted to a secret hearing to cover their own