Defence secretary tells court that secret new information has persuaded him to abandon movement of UK-captured detainees
Philip Hammond on Thursday halted plans to hand suspected insurgents captured by British troops to Afghan security forces on the grounds they risked being abused and tortured.
The defence secretary's lawyers told the high court that secret new information had persuaded him to abandon the transfers despite claims by British officials that the situation in Afghan jails had improved.
British commanders wanted to hand the detainees to the Afghan jail in Lashkar Gah, Helmand's provincial capital, the court heard. From there they could be sent to other Afghan prisons.
Thursday's hearing originated in a complaint by Afghan Serdar Mohammed, 24, who says he was arrested by UK forces in April 2010 while working on a farm. He alleges he was tortured into falsely confessing he was a member of the Taliban after being transferred to the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS) at Lashkar Gah.
Dinah Rose QC, for Mohammed, 24, told Lord Justice Moses that a letter had been received from Hammond stating "in the light of new information which has not been disclosed or described, there are currently reasonable grounds for believing that UK-captured detainees who are transferred to Lashkar Gah would be at real risk of serious mistreatment".
Although the Ministry of Defence declined to reveal what new information led Hammond to ban the transfer of Afghan detainees, it released a witness statement, used as secret evidence in a case two years ago, signed by Barry Burton, the MoD's senior official responsible for ensuring the legality of operations by British forces.
The statement referred to beatings, including the use of steel rods to the legs and feet of a suspected UK-captured insurgent transferred from Lashkar Gah to Kabul jail in breach of a moratorium and assurances given by the Afghan authorities to British commanders.
Rose told the high court the document was "essentially relevant" to this case since Mohammed was described as being of "high value" just like the prisoner described in the Burton statement.
Richard Stein, of the law firm Leigh Day, representing Mohammed, said after Thursday's hearing that the fact the Burton statement had been previously withheld highlighted the dangers of the government's planned justice and security bill. It could suppress information just because it would embarrass the government if disclosed, he said.
The high court has heard how the Foreign Office minister Lady Warsi this year failed to question assurances from Asadullah Khalid, head of the NDS, even though he was alleged to be widely known to have been personally involved in torture.
James Eadie QC, for the defence secretary, said Hammond had simply been applying his policy of keeping under review whether there was a real risk to detainees being transferred.
An MoD spokesperson said it took its legal and policy obligations to detainees captured by UK forces "very seriously" and did not transfer detainees to any facility where there was a real risk of mistreatment.