By PAUL REDFERN, Nation correspondent
Posted Monday, May 6 2013 at 11:26
Posted Monday, May 6 2013 at 11:26
Both the UK’s Foreign Office
and the firm who are negotiating on the part of the three Kenyans who
took the issue to the High Court in London last year would not comment
on the nature of the settlement.
Dan Leader, a partner with
Leigh Day, told the Guardian newspaper, which revealed the secret talks
on Monday said that both :parties “are currently exploring the
possibility of settling the claims brought by our clients. Clearly,
given the ongoing negotiations, we can't comment further."
The Foreign Office also said
that it would be "inappropriate" to discuss the talks. In a prepared
statement, however, it added: "We believe there should be a debate about
the past. It is an enduring feature of our democracy that we are
willing to learn from our history.
"We understand the pain and
grievance felt by those, on all sides, who were involved in the divisive
and bloody events of the Emergency period in Kenya. It is right that
those who feel they have a case are free to take it to the courts.
"Our relationship with Kenya
and its people has moved on and is characterised by close co-operation
and partnership, building on the many positives from our shared
history," said Leader
During the process of
decolonisation, the eight-year Mau Mau insurgency was one of the most
bloody conflict in which the British became embroiled, with up to 30,000
Kenyan deaths, both insurgent and loyalist.
Thousands of people –
estimates vary from 80,000 to 300,000 – were detained in a network of
camps, where many were brutally tortured.
If a settlement is made by the
British government it would be the first compensation settlement
resulting from official crimes committed under imperial rule and could
pave the way for many other claims from around the world.
Pressure to find a settlement
came following considerable international political pressure, with the
United Nations' special rapporteur on torture, Juan Méndez, calling
publicly on the UK government to "provide full redress to the victims,
including fair and adequate compensation", and writing privately to
David Cameron, to warn that the Britain's position was undermining its
moral authority across the world.
"In our view the response of
the British government to vulnerable and elderly victims of
(acknowledged) British torture is shameful," they wrote.
The result was that in April
the FCO told the claimants' lawyers, Leigh Day, that it wished to
adjourn its appeal against the High Court ruling and start negotiating a
settlement.
With the evidence stacked
against the UK government following the discovery of a vast archive of
over 8,000 colonial-era documents which the Foreign Office (FCO) had
kept hidden for decades, and which shed stark light on the dying days of
British rule, London knew its chances of winning the appeal were slim.
The Guardian newspaper said
that up to 10,000 former prisoners may be in line for compensation, if
the talks result in a settlement. Although the individual amounts will
vary greatly, the total compensation is likely to run into tens of
millions of pounds.
“The Foreign Office knows that
compensation payments to Mau Mau veterans are likely to trigger claims
from other former colonies,” the Guardian report said. “Any such claims,
if successful, would not only cost the British taxpayer many millions
of pounds; they could result in testimony and the emergence of
documentary evidence that would challenge long-cherished views of the
manner in which Britain withdrew from its empire.”
The documents show that many
prisoners suffered appalling abuses. In December 1954, one Nairobi
judge, Arthur Cram, compared the methods employed to those of the Nazi’s
Gestapo.
It is also known that one of those abused was Hussein Onyango Obama, the grandfather of Barack Obama.
It was not until the Kenyan
government lifted the ban on the Mau Mau in 2002 that survivors of the
camps began to consider legal action against the UK.
UK government lawyers initially argued that
the claim should not be heard, arguing that under the legal principle of
state succession, Mau Mau veterans should be suing the Kenyan
government and not the British.
When the claimants gave
evidence at the high court in London last year, Wambugu Wa Nyingi told
how he was detained on Christmas Eve 1952 and held for nine years, much
of the time in manacles. He was beaten unconscious during a particularly
notorious massacre at a camp at Hola in which 11 men died.
"I feel I was robbed of my
youth and that I did not get to do the things I should have done as a
young man," he said. "There is a saying in Kikuyu that old age lives off
the years of youth, but I have nothing to live off because my youth was
taken from me."
Foreign Office lawyers, faced
with the secret archive evidence and the expert witnesses, conceded
that the allegations made by Nyingi and the other claimants were true,
but continued to oppose their attempt to bring their case, arguing that
too much time had elapsed for there to be a fair trial.
That was rejected by the high
court last October, with the judge ruling that a fair trial remained
possible. "The documentation is voluminous," he said. "And the
governments and military commanders seem to have been meticulous record
keepers."
The FCO announced at the time
that it would appeal against a judgment that had "potentially
significant and far-reaching legal implications."
The Guardian said that any
compensation agreed would be paid only to people who can show they
suffered personal injury and grievous bodily harm, such as castration or
rape.
No comments:
Post a Comment