Briton held in Guantanamo hits out at 'disgraceful' UK Government

Britain's last resident being held in Guantanamo Bay has spoken for the first time about his sense of betrayal over the Government's refusal to release evidence which he claims will help prove his innocence.

In statements exclusively released to The Independent, Binyam Mohamed, 30, accuses MI5 agents of lying about what they knew of CIA plans to transfer him to a prison in north Africa, where he claims he was subjected to horrendous torture.

The Ethiopian national, who won asylum in the UK in 1994, has been charged with terrorism-related offences and awaits a decision on whether he is to face trial at the US naval base.

Mr Mohamed, who complains that his health is suffering badly, says: "To leave me in these conditions and, to add insult to injury, to defend the rigged process I am facing here, is a disgrace."

At the same time it has also emerged that the Government has written to the High Court in London, making it clear that ministers will not hand over the relevant evidence to Mr Mohammed's lawyers.

Last month two judges ruled that the British authorities still held secret material that might help confirm Mr Mohamed's story and that ministers should reconsider the decision.

The court said his allegations of torture were at least "arguable" and that MI5 had information relating to him that was "not only necessary but essential for his defence".

Government lawyers argue that Mr Mohamed's lawyers will be given any evidence by the US military commission and ordering the Foreign Office to hand over the documents to Mr Mohamed would harm relations between the US and UK intelligence services.

But Mr Mohamed asks: "How can they possibly be taking this position? Lord Steyn [the former law lord] himself called these [military] commissions 'kangaroo courts'. And I understood the official UK position to be that the commissions were illegal, and Britons should never be forced to go through them."

He adds: "So how, then, can they say that the very people who tortured me, rendered me, and now want to try me in a kangaroo court will just hand over the evidence of their own criminal acts? For the UK to say this is naïve, at best, and a betrayal, at worst."

Mr Mohamed also talked about the claim by MI5 "Agent B" in his High Court case that he had not threatened Mr Mohamed with rendition and torture. He says there was a second agent who heard the suggestion that Mr Mohamed would need more sugar in his tea "for where you are going". He claims: "I had two interrogators in Pakistan. 'B' was interrogating, but it was the other unknown agent who made the threat about the tea. This person – we'll call him 'Agent X' – walked in with 'B' at the start of the session. That was when he made the threat, and 'B' was there to hear it."

Reprieve, the British legal charity representing Mr Mohamed, described him as "very frail and depressed".

In his statements, which were declassified by the US authorities this week, Mr Mohamed alleges: "Not only am I denied my medical requests – and indeed any other request – I am held in a wing of Camp V where abuse is the order of the day."

He told his lawyer, Cori Crier, that last month he witnessed a prisoner who had been hunger-striking for over 20 days being dragged from his cell for force-feeding. "On day three this man had his head slammed into the floor. On day four, he was beaten so badly before the force-feeding that it seemed his leg broke."

In the High Court ruling last month, the judges said the "conduct of the Security Service facilitated interviews by or on behalf of the US when Binyam Mohamed was being detained by the US incommunicado" in 2002 in Pakistan. Working with the US, British authorities sent an officer from MI5 to interview him. The officer told him he could expect no help from Britain unless he fully co-operated with his US interrogators.

A government spokesman added: "We have never contested that Mr Mohamed's lawyers should have access to information which would assist his defence in any trial at Guantanamo Bay. It remains for the court to consider whether any benefit to Mr Mohamed from disclosure outweighs the damage caused to intelligence-sharing between the UK and the US, and national security."