The High Court of Justice dismissed a civil claim Wednesday brought by Rangzieb Ahmed against MI5, MI6, the Foreign Office, the Home Office, the Attorney General and Greater Manchester Police. Ahmed, who was convicted of a series of terror offences in 2008, issued proceedings against the defendants in 2009, claiming damages for false imprisonment, assault, battery, misfeasance in public office, negligence and conspiracy.

Ahmed claimed that while in the custody of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Agency in 2006, he was subjected to torture and inhuman and degrading treatment at the hands of the Pakistani authorities. Ahmed claimed that the officers of one or more of the defendants were complicit in his arrest and torture through supplying questions to be asked after he was detained in Pakistan. Ahmed further claimed that the defendants had failed to obtain assurances about access to court or lawyers when it was known or ought to have been known that he was exposed to a serious risk of torture, ill-treatment and arbitrary detention.

The defendants argued that to allow the civil claim to proceed would be an abuse of process since during the criminal proceedings it was found that “the UK authorities had not encouraged or assisted in the Claimant’s unlawful detention and ill treatment and argues that he is simply seeking to re-litigate these issues.”

Justice Garnham dismissed the claim on the grounds that the essential elements of the civil case had already been adjudicated upon in the criminal trial, concluding: “What matters is the effect that pursuing the civil claim would have on the criminal proceedings; in my judgment it is plain that the effect would be seriously to undermine the Judge’s ruling and the verdict of the jury.”

Garnham also refused an application by Ahmed’s representatives to rely on fresh evidence, stating that the material would not “transform the case.”