EIT:n suuri jaosto: Yhdistynyt Kuningaskunta lähtökohtaisesti vastuussa henkilön vapaudenriistosta Irakin sodassa

EIT:n suuri jaosto on tänään antamassaan tuomiossa katsonut, että Yhdistynyt Kuningaskunta oli vastuussa vangin vapaudenriistosta Irakin operaatiossa vuonna 2003 siltä osin, kuin vanki oli ollut brittiläisten joukkojen kiinniottamana. Tuomioistuin ei kuitenkaan katsonut – äänin 13-4 – EIS 5 artiklaa loukatun eikä ottanut valitusta tutkittavaksi siltä osin, kun kyse oli EIS 2 ja 3 artiklan väitetystä loukkauksesta.

EIT:n lehdistötiedotteesta:

The case Hassan v. the United Kingdom (application no. 29750/09) concerned the capture of an Iraqi national, Tarek Hassan, by the British armed forces and his detention at Camp Bucca in southeastern Iraq during the hostilities in 2003. His brother claims that Tarek was under the control of British forces, and that his dead body was subsequently found bearing marks of torture and execution.

In today’s Grand Chamber judgment1 in the case the European Court of Human Rights held:

unanimously, that Tarek Hassan had been within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom between the time of his arrest by British troops, in April 2003, until his release from the bus that had taken him from Camp Bucca under military escort to a drop-off point, in May 2003; but by 13 votes to 4, that there had been no violation of Article 5 §§ 1, 2 , 3 or 4 (right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights as concerned the actual capture and detention of Tarek Hassan.

The case concerned the acts of British armed forces in Iraq, extra-territorial jurisdiction and the application of the European Convention of Human Rights in the context of an international armed conflict. In particular, this was the first case in which a contracting State had requested the Court to disapply its obligations under Article 5 or in some other way to interpret them in the light of powers of detention available to it under international humanitarian law.

The Court decided that international humanitarian law and the European Convention both provided safeguards from arbitrary detention in time of armed conflict and that the grounds of permitted deprivation of liberty set out in Article 5 of the Convention should be accommodated, as far as possible, with the taking of prisoners of war and the detention of civilians who pose a risk to security under the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions. In the present case, it found that there had been legitimate grounds under international law for capturing and detaining Tarek Hassan, who had been found by British troops, armed and on the roof of his brother’s house, where other weapons and documents of a military intelligence value had been retrieved. Moreover, following his admission to Camp Bucca, he had been subjected to a screening process, which established that he was a civilian who did not pose a threat to security and led to his being cleared for release. Tarek Hassan’s capture and detention had not therefore been arbitrary.

The complaints under Article 2 (right to life) and 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) concerning the alleged ill-treatment and death of Tarek Hassan were declared inadmissible for lack of evidence.

Koko lehdistötiedote, missä myös linkki koko tuomioon, löytyy täältä: Press release