Bindman criticises decision granting immunity to Saudi state & officials
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) showed “subservience” to the UK courts in its recent decision on four British men detained in Saudi Arabia, a leading legal commentator has claimed.
Writing in NLJ this week, Sir Geoffrey Bindman QC, described the court’s ruling in Jones and others v United Kingdom [2014] ECHR 32 as “disappointing”.
The case concerned four British expatriates tortured and detained in the kingdom for up to three years after three of them were falsely accused of murder and the fourth falsely accused of a bombing. The court accepted the UK government’s argument that immunity of the Saudi state and its officials did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights.
Bindman writes: “Those who recall the Pinochet case may be puzzled.
“In 1998, the House of Lords denied immunity to the former Chilean dictator when the Spanish government sought his extradition to face a criminal prosecution for widespread torture and murder of his political opponents. How then can one explain granting it to the Saudis?
“And how can one explain the refusal of the ECtHR to give effect to the UN Convention against Torture, adopted in 1984, to which both the UK and Saudi Arabia are among the 154 state parties?”
While the UK government supported the men during their imprisonment and helped to secure their release, it failed to put “effective pressure” on the Saudis to compensate them. Bindman called on the government to change the law to remove immunity for torture in the future.
