- guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 March 2010 12.57 GMT
The case of Binyam Mohamed, who was tortured in Afghanistan, Morocco and Guantánamo Bay, has thrown new light on the UK's role in sanctioning such activities. Photograph: Shaun Curry/AFP/Getty Images
The government is locked in a serious and bitter dispute with the parliamentary body set up to monitor MI5 and MI6 over the guidelines covering the torture and abuse of detainees held abroad, the Guardian has learned.
The dispute, compounded by a row about plans for more effective overall scrutiny of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ, has added significance since it has been sparked by a group of senior MPs and peers handpicked by the prime minister.
In a surprise move, the government is refusing to publish criticisms of new guidelines on interrogating prisoners, notably terror suspects, drawn up by the intelligence and security committee, the ISC.
A Whitehall spokesman said the government welcomed what he called the "critical contribution" of the committee in reviewing the guidance. He described it as "comprehensive and insightful", but it had "raised a number of issues that need further consideration".
The committee, chaired by the former Foreign Office minister Kim Howells, said its review of the guidance on handling detainees was sent to Gordon Brown on 5 March but publication was a "matter for the prime minister".
The ISC has been under fire for being too subservient to the security and intelligence agencies and to the prime minister, who chooses its members and has a veto over what the committee can publish.
However, the Guardian has learned that MPs and peers on the committee – perhaps stung by recent criticism – have expressed serious concern to Gordon Brown about the lack of clarity and "ambiguities" in the guidance for MI5 and MI6 officers operating abroad.
The Foreign Office said yesterday that Britain had to continue to work with foreign agencies in the fight against terrorism, even if they do not share UK standards on human rights. It said in its latest annual report on human rights that the UK could not afford the "luxury" of co-operating only with agencies in countries which did not abuse or torture detainees.
It said British agencies tried to minimise the risk that detainees held overseas were mistreated, but it was not always possible to "reduce the risk to zero". The Foreign Office report said it was ultimately for ministers to decide whether the needs of national security outweighed concerns about possible mistreatment.
In its latest annual report, published today, the ISC also sharply attacks the government for rejecting its demand for more independence, specifically greater control over its expenditure and separation from the Cabinet Office, which oversees the work of the intelligence agencies on behalf of the government.
"Separation and independence are the key issues", said Howells. "We are therefore surprised and disappointed that the government's response to our report has failed to respond positively and kicks the issue into the long grass."
He added: "We now find ourselves in an inappropriate position whereby we sit within a government department which has a significant role in the UK intelligence community which we also oversee. The fact that the Cabinet Office also decides and allocates the committee's budget and employs our staff is another conflict of interest."