§ Lord Aveburyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Which department is responsible for the document INTG 1, entitled Interrogation; for whom it is intended; which paragraphs are intended to apply to peace-time situations; whether Special Branch in the absence of the military would use the methods described in INTG 1; whether any joint teams/centres have been formed as described in paragraph 25 and if so, whether they will give details, under what circumstances such teams would be formed; what countries have sent members of their police or armed forces to Great Britain to train in the methods described; on what date the document was issued; whether it is still current and if not, what is the title and reference of the document which has replaced it.
§ The Minister of State for Defence Support (Lord Trefgarne)The document concerned is a Ministry of Defence training précis for use on courses for military personnel in interrogation techniques which they would require in war. It is a general introduction to the use of interrogation for military intelligence purposes and, although it was first issued some years ago, it remains current.
It is primarily concerned with the interrogation of prisoners of war but, in order to be comprehensive, also includes a few paragraphs (24 to 30) which relate to internal security operations overseas of the sort in which the British armed forces have in the past occasionally been involved, for example in Malaya in the 1950s. These paragraphs draw attention to the special factors to be taken into account if military interrogators are used during such operations although, as the document notes, interrogations would normally be under the control of the police in the country concerned (generally the local special branch or equivalent). The detailed interrogation procedures 533WA described in the document are therefore concerned only with military intelligence requirements during war.
British troops are not currently engaged in any operations of this kind and, consequently, no joint police/military teams or centres as envisaged in the document exist. It is difficult to foresee circumstances in which the requirement for military interrogators to become involved in such operations could recur, although it is only prudent to take some account of the possibility in training.
Training in various aspects of intelligence and security is provided to members of the armed forces of NATO and other close allies, but it is not our practice to list the specific countries to which we give particular types of training.