Their Lordships Reject Torture Evidence

There was a time when everything was so simple. An idealist at heart and a liberal democrat (in the literal sense rather than party political) I abhorred the idea of unelected offices in government. The second chamber should be elected by the people to represent the will of the people as with the commons. The Lords, unelected and of the privileged elite were an anachronism and undemocratic.

Unfortunately as I have discovered, the commons will use “public opinion” when it suits it to push through nasty legislation, yet in reality treats democracy with contempt. The recent “90 days” debacle was an example of such brazen populism. Conversely, it is probable that the majority of the populace (if they have given the matter some thought) do not support the idea of identity cards, yet our representatives in parliament went ahead and voted “aye” anyway.

That the use of evidence gained though torture is even on the agenda is an indication of just how far into the abyss our government has sunk. On a pragmatic level, the evidence gained is unreliable, tainted as it is with the victim telling the interrogator whatever is necessary to stop the pain – truth is the third casualty (the first being the hapless victim; the second, our humanity). On a moral level, I cannot fathom – even though I try – why any civilised society should consider it acceptable. Oh, yes, I’ve heard the cries of “terrorism” time and time again as have we all, and it is becoming tedious. The “war on terror” is being used as a rallying cry to justify every little erosion of our civil liberties that the governments of the so-called free world choose to seize upon next. All in the name of “public safety” you understand. Robespierre would be proud of his legacy in Whitehall and Washington.

500 years ago, Anne Boleyn was murdered by the state using evidence gained through torture – not one jot of the charges brought against her were true. The political landscape may have changed in the last 500 years, but it seems the scruples of our government have more to do with Thomas Cromwell’s star chamber than a modern democracy.

Worrying, too, is the reaction among members of the public when the matter is debated. Jeremy Vine discussed this when the matter was about to be referred to the Lords a few weeks ago. Far from outright condemnation from his listeners, there was support for the idea – because, it seems, it might catch some terrorists. Of course, it won’t be them or theirs being tortured, it will be brown people, so that’s all okay.

We really haven’t moved on. It is all a veneer, this civilisation of ours. Underneath, we are as cold, cruel and inhuman as our Tudor forbears. And the Lords? Well, today, they have rejected the use of evidence gained from torture – and quite right, too. Which brings me back to my opening point. Once more, we rely on an unelected chamber to do the right thing and defend us from the activities of an elected body that has lost its way.

“An independent judiciary has once again been more effective in defending individual rights than this government”
Sir Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrats

My ideals of twenty years ago are once more up for re-evaluation.