BarryM

David Cameron these days ordered an unprecedented inquiry into proof and allegations of British complicity within the torture and abuse of terror suspects.

But he instantly moved to make sure the courts would no longer be capable to disclose damning proof which, he implied, could jeopardise intelligence sharing using the US.

Honouring a promise although in opposition that he would set up a judge-led inquiry into mounting proof, emerging mainly from court hearings, the prime minister told the Commons he had asked Sir Peter Gibson – a previous appeal court judge who privately monitors the activities from the intelligence agencies – to "look at regardless of whether Britain was implicated within the improper remedy of detainees held by other countries that might have occurred within the aftermath of 9/11".

He mentioned that although there was no proof that any British officer was "directly engaged in torture" within the aftermath of 9/11 there had been "questions more than the degree to which British officers had been working with foreign protection providers who had been treating detainees in methods they ought to not have done".

Though he did not point directly to a specific case, he created obvious he was referring to proof disclosed through the higher court that MI5 knew about the abuse of Binyam Mohamed, a British resident held incognito in Pakistan in 2002 prior to becoming secretly rendered to jails in Morocco, Afghanistan, and Guantánamo Bay.

In rulings extremely critical of federal government officials, a string of senior judges ruled this year that CIA info showing MI5 involvement in abuse ought to be disclosed. The US created it obvious it was appalled and suggested it would cut off intelligence sharing using the UK. To avoid any repeat of such disclosures, Cameron told MPs the federal government intended to publish a green paper setting out "proposals for how intelligence is treated within the complete range of judicial proceedings, such as addressing the concerns of our allies".

Federal government officials created obvious ministers are seeking legislation that would in future avoid judges release info passed to MI5 through the CIA or by any other foreign intelligence agency.

He mentioned the federal government wanted to pursue "mediation" with six previous Guantánamo Bay detainees who had brought civil claims about their remedy – and who are demanding the disclosure of MI5 and MI6 intelligence. They will probably be offered out-of-court compensation.

The inquiry by Gibson, who will probably be assisted by Dame Janet Paraskeva, head from the civil service commissioners, and Peter Riddell, the previous Times journalist and fellow from the Institute of Federal government, won't be capable to summon foreign witnesses or compel previous Labour ministers to testify.

Nevertheless, the inquiry has the freedom to investigate the policies that underpinned MI5 and MI6 conduct. Critically, it could permit the inquiry to identify the federal government ministers who authorised those policies.

Widespread support for the inquiry was expressed , qualified by concern more than the degree of secrecy which will surround it, and more than its inability to compel previous ministers to appear.

There was also concern that the government's new interrogation guidelines for British intelligence officers – published following becoming recently rewritten – contained numerous loopholes that could still lead to it becoming utilized to facilitate torture.

Andrew Tyrie, a backbench Tory MP who has been campaigning for an inquiry for a number of years, welcomed "a large step forward". He added: "They wouldn't be in this mess but for all of the excuses for secret stitch-ups rather than open justice. This inquiry can only be credible using the broadest remit, the most public proceedings feasible and by complete engagement with victims, witnesses and lawyers. Any make an effort to exempt intelligence from legal scrutiny is definitely an make an effort to exempt the protection providers through the rule of law."

Tom Porteous, the London director from the New York-based NGO Human Rights Watch mentioned: "The PM's announcement of an inquiry is definitely an superb very first step towards re-establishing the UK's credentials as a rights respecting nation."