‘All the Perfumes of Arabia’: The House of Lords and ‘Foreign Torture Evidence’

Abstract

Although the House of Lords has now made it clear that evidence obtained by means of torture conducted abroad by non-UK nationals is inadmissible in judicial proceedings in the United Kingdom, the position remains unsatisfactory. Restrictive approaches have been taken to many of the key issues, suggesting that there is still considerable scope for the use of evidence which is brought to light as a result of forms of ill-treatment which violate human rights standards. Moreover, the use of ‘foreign torture evidence’ by the executive is expressly sanctioned. Even if this strikes an appropriate balance between conflicting goals of public safety and judicial propriety, it cannot be said to further the realization of the international prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and is a poor reflection of the abhorrence of torture which the House of Lords itself says is a feature of domestic common law.