No surprise that the government rejected a judicial inquiry into allegations of torture tonight.Kim Howells, Labour Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee and John Scarlett, Head of MI6, have come out defending the intelligence services. This follows the slight article from yesterday's Sunday Telegraph where David Miliband pronounced that information from whatever source was considered and that the UK could never fully eradicate the possibility that torture was used.
This utility test on the value of the intelligence supplied is one that the intelligence services must be free to apply without weighing the corruption of the source against the abstract notion of human rights. No liberal democratic regime can run the risk of discarding any intelligence on the grounds of its geographical chance if there is a possibility that lives can be saved. Fundamentalists will argue that a moral figleaf is not preserved by a passive reception rather than the active condoning of torture to obtain information. But navigating an end-run around morality in the dirty business of intelligence is difficult enough without condemnation now verging on conspiracy.
That is why the rejection of a judicial inquiry into accusations of torture may be premature. Many of the allegations have been explicit and well-sourced. Kim Howells' protestation that oversight from his Committee is sufficient raises suspicions in an age fed on the overweening ties of the Establishment. A perception that the Hutton Inquiry did little to dispel. Too many times have we heard voices raised on rendition, outsourcing of interrogations to third-world thugs and the feeding of questions.
Given the dripfeed of innuendo, a limited inquiry, without identification of officers working on behalf of their country, would provide clarity on these issues and educate us on the conflicting pressures laid down by law and politics. The secret service is judged by results and condemned for their methods. Perhaps an inquiry may reveal that we can have it both ways, and that, up to now, we have let ourselves down.