'Hooded Men' case rejected by European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has rejected an appeal by the Irish government against a ruling that found the UK did not torture 14 men interned without trial during the Troubles.

The so-called Hooded Men claim they were subjected to a number of torture methods when they were detained without trial at a British military camp in Northern Ireland in 1971.

These included five techniques - hooding, stress positions, white noise, sleep deprivation and deprivation of food and water - along with beatings and death threats.

Earlier this year, the ECHR dismissed Ireland's request to find the men suffered torture and said there was no justification for revising an original judgment in 1978 that held that while the men suffered inhumane and degrading treatment, they were not tortured.

The Irish authorities took the case to Europe after highlighting what it said was fresh evidence.

In March, the court said new material had not demonstrated the existence of facts that were not known to the court at the time or which could have had a decisive influence on the original judgment.

The ECHR dismissed the appeal by six votes to one.

Darragh Mackin, solicitor for a number of the Hooded Men said:

“In what is a disappointing decision, it comes as no surprise for those victims of the techniques. As was expressly highlighted by the dissenting judge in March, it is hard not to think that the Court was hiding behind nuanced procedure to shield itself from the thorny issue at the heart of this case.

This case was always highly supercharged given the potential ramifications of any decision to overturn the original judgment.

It is concerning that the Court has allowed, for a second time, the injustice that is the first ruling to go unscathed. For too long the first ruling has been used for a number of international states as a battering ram against human rights protections, when utilising torturous techniques.

These techniques were and are torture. The Belfast High Court has said it, the London Supreme Court has said it. It is disheartening that the European Court has instead used procedural gymnastics to avoid saying the same.

However, the campaign for justice for The hooded men is not over. They now eagerly await the judgment by the Court of Appeal in Belfast in which the Chief Constable of the PSNI appealed a decision that requires the identification and prosecution of those individuals whom perpetrated and authorised the techniques are held accountable.”

Francis McGuigan, one of the Hooded Men said:

“Whilst today is yet another setback, it is by no means the end. We have already received a legal ruling confirming our treatment was torture. It is disappointing that the European Court missed an opportunity to correct such an unjust ruling, however we now eagerly await the Court of Appeals decision, and seeing those responsible held accountable.”

Amnesty International has described it as a “bitter blow”.

Grainne Teggart, Amnesty’s Northern Ireland Campaigns Manager, said:

“Today’s decision is a bitter blow for the men and their families. The European Court has failed to let the Grand Chamber consider Ireland’s request to right a historic wrong.

“When Amnesty visited the detainees in 1971, we found clear evidence of torture. Our assessment has not changed in the years since and today’s decision does not change this. The torture of these men was approved at the highest level of Government. Justice is long overdue.

“We need an independent and effective investigation in line with the UK’s international human rights obligations. Those responsible for sanctioning and carrying out torture, at all levels, must be held accountable and, where possible, prosecuted.”

Fiona Crowley, Amnesty Ireland’s Research and Legal Manager, said:

“Amnesty International still considers that the ‘hooded men’ were tortured. While today’s decision is disappointing, Amnesty recalls that the Chamber decision in March was not a finding that the ‘five techniques’ fall short of torture by today’s standards. States which have used the 1978 decision to justify torture can find no comfort/support in this decision. The March decision was on a revision request. If this case were heard afresh by the Court today, we are confident that what was done to these men would be deemed torture.

“Amnesty International again commends the Irish Government for persisting in its efforts to help these men, and the families of the men who have since died, to have their rights to truth and justice vindicated. In 1971, Ireland took a brave, unprecedented step when bringing the case against the UK. In seeking a revision and then seeking to appeal to the Grand Chamber, Ireland has stood in defence of the absolute prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.”