---

Mr. Ingram: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his message of support for our troops and the superb work that they are doing. He asked several questions about the authenticity of the photographs, but, as I said in my opening statement, it is not for Ministers to interfere and involve themselves in the minutiae of an ongoing investigation. It is a matter for the investigating authorities to bring to a conclusion. I therefore have no evidence one way or the other on the matter. Clearly, given the speculation outside, it is right and proper that the appropriate authorities are pursuing that line of inquiry.

The hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames) asked how many cases are currently in the process of investigation. So far, 33 cases of civilian deaths, injuries or ill treatment have been investigated in Iraq: 12 are ongoing, and 21 have been completed. Of the completed cases, 15 were found to have no case to answer, and six recommendations are currently being considered. That is the current position. Those recommendations will go through the appropriate process of law, which means independent of the chain of command and with no ministerial involvement.

The hon. Gentleman also asked about the training of our troops and I know that he is aware of the answer. We give our troops the highest level of training in all aspects of international law, the Geneva conventions and human rights issues. Indeed, we are renowned internationally for the work that we do in helping failed states to raise their standards through various post-conflict initiatives. We sometimes help countries to come back into the wider community of nations. Anyone visiting such countries would hear of the
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1214
 
qualities spoken about by those who have been trained by our troops, showing that what we teach our troops is imparted with full vigour elsewhere.

The hon. Gentleman rightly ended by highly commending the QLR, which is indeed a first-class regiment. He is right to point to the significant number of high awards received by its troops during the recent conflict in Iraq. I am sure that the vast majority of them, if not all, will be very concerned about these allegations.

Mr. Paul Keetch (Hereford) (LD): I, too, thank the Minister for advance notice of his statement. I welcome it and I congratulate him on his words. We believe that there are serious doubts about the authenticity of the Daily Mirror photos. Whether or not they are genuine, I agree with the Minister that, the sooner we can sort out this story, the better for all concerned. However, there can be no doubt about the photos taken of US troops, or, indeed, those of UK forces taken by a fusilier who was arrested last year. I ask the Minister to tell us the outcome of that investigation.

Liberal Democrat Members have asked many questions about the alleged instances of mistreatment. When will those questions be answered—they have not been answered since January—and how many legal cases does the Minister expect to be brought as a result of families' actions this week? It is suggested that the US military did not co-operate with the Red Cross at Abu Ghraib prison camp. Will the Minister give an assurance today that the Red Cross will be given full and complete access to all detainees held under UK control in Iraq?

Finally, the Ministry of Defence stated last month that the European convention on human rights does not apply in Iraq, despite the fact that the UK has signed it and that many courts believe that it applies to the agents of those states that have signed it. Under what position and under what human rights laws are Iraqis held in UK custody in Iraq?

The men and women of Her Majesty's armed forces have an unequalled reputation for professionalism and honour—and that includes the QLR. If they continue to demonstrate that in Iraq as they have been, the whole House and the country should support them. However, if that reputation is to be preserved, the Government must act on this matter with speed and with transparency.

Mr. Ingram: In closing, the hon. Gentleman asked a pertinent question about the need for openness. That is why I said that I would seek to impart to the House as much information as possible about all these ongoing investigations when we are able to do so. Subsequently, the information will be imparted to the wider public. We must also bear it in mind that we have to protect the rights of everyone associated with what may be a legal process. It is not for us to judge—only, perhaps, to examine, to ask questions and to move the process forward by ensuring that all the proper procedures are being applied.

The hon. Gentleman asked how many legal cases we expect to emerge from this matter. I cannot predict that. Aggrieved persons must determine what laws they will seek to apply in any given circumstances. Our best judgment is that the European convention on human rights does not apply. I assume that that will be tested in
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1215
 
law, as I believe that a community of people exists who will seek to do just that. We know that some groups of lawyers have already indicated that they propose to bring actions against the Government in this matter. We shall have to see how all that plays out.

The hon. Gentleman also asked whether the International Committee of the Red Cross would be given full access. The answer is yes: we seek at all times to work closely with the ICRC, which sets very high standards. It is right that we give it access, and that we listen to any comments or criticisms that it may make about how we deal with people in our custody.

I hope that that answers the hon. Gentleman's questions. If not, or if any other points arise, we can return to the matter at a later stage.

Mr. Peter Mandelson (Hartlepool) (Lab): Many aspects of this matter will worry people, and that is understandable. However, what worries me is that, although the leader in today's Daily Mirror says that the matter is the subject of "concern and investigation", the headline on the front page talks, apparently conclusively and as though it were a proven fact, of British Army torture of Iraqis. That is a most unfortunate piece of journalism. Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to reaffirm that the rules of natural justice still exist in this country? Is not it an important principle that people against whom allegations are made remain innocent until they are proven guilty? Will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that that principle will govern the approach of the Army and the Government to this whole matter?

Mr. Ingram: I agree wholeheartedly with my right hon. Friend, and in my statement I tried to highlight the principle to which he refers. I also noted that the SIB is in touch with the Daily Mirror, and I hope that the newspaper will give the investigators the fullest co-operation.

In its leader last Saturday, the Daily Mirror said that

"for the sake of the British Army's reputation and the integrity of every decent member of our forces, those who carried out this and other savage acts must be court-martialled."

I think that everyone can understand those sentiments, but the implication is that guilt has been established already. That is not the case. The Daily Mirror claims to know the identity of one of the attackers, saying that he and a colleague provided the photographs and the information that were the basis for the allegations. Nevertheless, the newspaper appears intent on protecting the identities of its informants, because, it says, the soldiers fear reprisals by the Army.

I genuinely do not understand the concern about reprisals. I have every confidence that everyone with relevant information will be treated fairly and lawfully, and that their rights will be fully respected. That is why I hope—and I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) will agree with me on this—that the Daily Mirror will reconsider its position and assist the investigating authorities in getting to the bottom of these most serious allegations.

Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): At each stage of the detention process, from apprehension to theatre internment facility, it is very important that
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1216
 
there is external scrutiny by independent non-governmental organisations. That is helpful for individuals, and for Army units. What reports has the Minister received from external organisations about the way in which detainees have been handled?

Mr. Ingram: I fully recognise the point made by the hon. Gentleman, whose question I sought to answer in my response to the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Keetch). We do not deny access, as the hon. Gentleman will know from his own military experience. We fully comply with the requirements placed on us by international law. Indeed, we often tend to go beyond what is asked of us, to ensure that appropriate NGOs have adequate access to prisoners. Sometimes we go further, and allow individuals to visit detainees as well. That allows tremendous scrutiny of what is going on.

The hon. Gentleman asked whether I had received any adverse or other reports. To date, I have received no such reports, but some may be in the process of being compiled. The ICRC is authoritative and operates in a precise and structured way. It will make known its concerns, and if we need to act on them, we will.

---