Court rules case of Libyan exile, who was flown to Tripoli and tortured, can go ahead despite government attempts to stop it

A Libyan politician who was abducted in a joint MI6-CIA operation has welcomed an appeal court ruling that allows him to sue the UK government for his rendition, a decision that establishes a significant precedent for other claims.

Abdel Hakim Belhaj and his Moroccan wife, Fatima Bouchar, were secretly flown in 2004 to Tripoli, where Muammar Gaddafi’s security forces tortured him, and, it is alleged, British intelligence officers took part in his interrogation.

The court of appeal ruled on Thursday that the case should go ahead despite government attempts to resist it on grounds of the “act of state doctrine”, arguing that the courts could not inquire into what happened because it involved a foreign state.

Speaking to the Guardian from Libya, Belhaj, 48, said: “I always had faith in the British justice system. The right decision has been made. I feel I am getting closer to realising justice in my case.”

The British government maintained that the UK’s relations with the US would be seriously damaged if Belhaj was allowed to sue and make his case in a British court. The Foreign Office is considering whether to appeal.

The judgment said that while the trial relating to the couple’s rendition was likely to require a British court to assess the wrongfulness of acts by the CIA and Libyan agents, that was no reason to bar the claim.

The case has been brought by the Libyan couple against the former foreign secretary, Jack Straw, MI6’s former director of counter-terrorism, Sir Mark Allen, the Foreign Office, the Home Office and MI5.

The ruling said: “[These] respondents … are not entitled to any immunity before the courts in this jurisdiction … Their conduct, considered in isolation, would not normally be exempt from investigation by the courts.

“There is a compelling public interest in the investigation by the English courts of these very grave allegations. The risk of displeasing our allies or offending other states … cannot justify our declining jurisdiction on grounds of act of state over what is a properly justiciable claim.”

It added: “The stark reality is that unless the English courts are able to exercise jurisdiction in this case, these very grave allegations against the executive will never be subjected to judicial investigation.”

Belhaj, who is now head of Libya’s Al-Watan political party, said he would be discussing with his lawyers about giving evidence in a future trial. “It would be great if I and my wife could be present at the hearing in order to explain exactly what the impact of these events has been.

“There’s still a large effect, especially when I catch myself thinking about what happened to my wife, who was pregnant at the time. We were subject to a long period of bad treatment.”

Belhaj was held in Tajoura prison, near Tripoli, where he says he was chained to a window, deprived of sleep, beaten, hung from the walls and kept in solitary confinement. He claims he was also interrogated by British intelligence officers who visited his cell.

Allen admitted the UK’s role in the rendition in a letter sent to Moussa Koussa, then Libya’s intelligence chief. It was later discovered along with other documents in Tripoli showing that British security and intelligence officers supplied Belhaj’s interrogators with questions to ask him when he was in prison.

“On two or three occasions, delegations of MI6 officers visited me in Tajoura,” Belhaj said. “They asked me various questions but while that was going on I made every attempt to indicate to them that I was subject to ill treatment in prison. I’m certain they understood but I didn’t see any response from them.

“The Libyan security services were very keen for the British to send other [Libyan exiles] back to Tripoli. The Libyan intelligence agencies were trying to force me to testify against other people, including Libyans who were living in Britain and had UK citizenship – which is appalling.”

Belhaj is seeking nominal damages of £1 and an apology from the British government. “I’m not interested in taking revenge for the past,” he said. “I want to build relations with the UK afresh. It’s natural for people to want to have justice to right their wrongs. We are very thankful for the way the British stood by us when we rid ourselves of the regime of Gaddafi. My faith in British justice has been restored.”

Responding to the judgment, Cori Crider, a director of the human rights organisation Reprieve and the family’s US lawyer, said: “The government so fears this case going to trial that they have stalled for years by throwing up a parade of scarecrows – claiming, for example, that the United States would be angered if Mr and Mrs Belhaj had their day in court in Britain.

“The court [judgment] was right: embarrassment is no reason to throw torture victims out of court. The government’s dubious and wasteful delay tactics in this case need to end.”

Sapna Malik from law firm Leigh Day, who represented Belhaj and Bouchar, said: “The court of appeal has rightly recognised that the gravity of the allegations raised by our clients makes it all the more compelling for the English courts to get on and deal with their case and to reject outright the attempts by Jack Straw, Mark Allen and the government defendants to shield their conduct from judicial scrutiny.Our clients are now a significant step closer to seeing justice done in their case.”

Many human rights organisations intervened in the case to support Belhaj’s claim. John Dalhuisen, of Amnesty International, said: ”The court of appeal has ... set the stage for real accountability in the UK, which has been a long time in coming. Other states implicated in the CIA rendition and secret detention programmes – eg Poland, Lithuania, Romania – must also commit to conducting effective investigations that reveal the whole truth about Europe’s complicity in these appalling crimes, hold perpetrators accountable, and give victims access to justice.”

Carla Ferstman, of Redress, said: “Until now, these very grave allegations have never been scrutinised by a court. Mr Belhaj and Ms Bouchar have a right to know what happened to them and if the UK government or its officials played a part in their kidnapping and illegal transfer to Libya, where they were subsequently imprisoned and tortured.”

Andrea Coomber, of Justice, said: “The government’s case would fundamentally undercut the international rule of law and undermine the global commitment to remedies for victims of human rights violations. The ‘they did it too’ defence traditionally hasn’t worked in the playground. Yet, the UK government would – in expanding the ‘act of state’ doctrine and the scope of state immunity – seek to enshrine it in common law. States cannot be encouraged to supplement the international law of state immunity with their own pick and mix patchwork of domestic rules on justiciability.”

The Foreign Office said: “We note the judgment of the court of appeal. We are studying the detail, and considering whether to make an application to appeal to the supreme court. It would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.”

In a related development, lawyers for the intelligence agencies are due to hand over their secret policies setting out when they can intercept communications between lawyers and their clients. The material has been requested by lawyers for Belhaj in a claim before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The documents, retyped and with some redactions, are expected to be released next week.