COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MACKAY
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN
LORD JUSTICE PITCHFORD
| MS (ALGERIA)
|- and -
|SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Lisa Giovannetti and Robert Palmer (instructed by The Treasury Solicitor) for the Respondent
Rupert Pardoe appeared as Special Advocate
Hearing dates: 15th and 16th February 2011
Crown Copyright ©
President of the Queen's Bench Division:
This is the judgment of the Court.
SIAC and Algerian assurances
"In place, therefore, of independent monitoring the current system relies on contact between families and Algerian lawyers with the British Embassy. Embassy staff do not routinely visit prisons or attend trials of non-UK nationals, but are in touch with the NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Mr Layden said that if there was a credible allegation that a returnee had been ill treated they would treat that as a good reason to ask the Algerians to see the person concerned and he believed that they would be allowed to do so. If they did not there was an apparent breach of the assurances. The first step would be to take the matter up with the Algerian authorities at the level of Maitre Amara and, if his response was unhelpful or unsatisfactory, it would be taken up at higher ministerial level, if necessary to the President himself. He has had discussions with the current Foreign Secretary on this topic and understands him to support the principle that the assurances should be supported, if necessary, by such action."
They said that documents relating to Q and H showed that this system worked tolerably well. SIAC then referred to the passage in the opinion of Lord Hoffmann in RB (Algeria) to which we have referred, to the effect that there is no rule of law that external monitoring is required; and that the question depends on the facts of the particular case. The position in MS's appeal was no different from that which prevailed in RB (Algeria) and SIAC's judgment was the same. They were satisfied that verification of the fulfilment of the assurances was capable of being achieved by the means currently in place and by the determination of Mr Layden to ensure that significant breaches do not go unreported, but are pursued in a vigorous manner.
Grounds of appeal
SIAC's closed judgment