Jones v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia fr en

Country of proceedings: United Kingdom
Context of crimes: War on terrorism (Saudi Arabia)
Date: 2004 - 2006
Keywords: Torture, jurisdiction, immunity (sovereign) 

Court documents
14-6-2006 - House of Lords, Appellate Committee

Presentation of the case

Four British citizens were accused of being involved a bombing in Riyadh in 2001. They were allegedly tortured and subject to cruel punishment during their time in the custody of Saudi police. The British citizens brought claims for damages in the United Kingdom. They claimed aggravated and exemplary damages for torture, assault and battery, trespass to the person, and unlawful imprisonment against the Saudi officials said to be responsible for these crimes, and the Saudi Ministry of the Interior, the principal government agency responsible for the treatment of prisoners and detainees.

The Court held that torture is not a peremptory norm that overrules the international legal doctrine of state immunity. According to Lord Hoffman, the prohibition of torture does not create an exception to the rule of state immunity that “entitles or perhaps requires states to assume civil jurisdiction over other states in cases in which torture is alleged.” The House of Lords overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal, holding that the victims did not have the right to sue Saudi authorities in UK courts.  The Court accepted the argument that State Immunity Act (UK) 1978 has the effect of protecting Saudi authorities from civil actions.