The UK government has said it breached the human rights of nine Iraqi prisoners. It made the admission in a court case relating to the death of Baha Mousa, a hotel receptionist, and the mistreatment of eight other Iraqi civilians. They were held in a British detention centre in Basra in September 2003. The Ministry of Defence admits a "substantive breach" of Article 2 (right to life), and Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment), of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The court case raised the question of whether the Convention should be applied outside the UK. The MoD conceded that the ECHR did apply in UK detention facilities in Iraq, but argued that it did not apply to the other situations before the court – those concerning five separate fatal shootings by UK forces in Basra. The Law Lords upheld the MoD’s arguments, but on a separate question, ruled that the UK Human Rights Act applies outside the UK. Legal proceedings can therefore be brought in UK courts, and do not need to go to the European Court of Human Rights. The MoD apologised to Mousa’s family and the other eight Iraqi detainees, and noted that such acts of abuse had been carried out by a very small minority of British troops.

> The father of the man who died says the MoD’s admission "shows that our voices can still be heard and that Iraqi lives do count." Discuss the importance of such recognition to people seeking justice. Can students think of other cases where people spend years in court to have an injustice recognised? Who benefits and who loses if breaches of fundamental human rights are not acknowledged?

> It is likely that other allegations of abuse and ill-treatment of detainees will come before UK courts. Some people argue that bad things happen in any armed conflict and that just has to be accepted. Do students have sympathy with that view? There are calls for public inquiries by independent judges into such allegations of ill-treatment. How fair and practical do students think an inquiry will be while fighting continues?

The number of under-18 year olds attending UK universities is rising rapidly. There are now nearly 8,000 such students in higher education. Although most are 17, there could be up to a hundred who are under 16.

The incidence is thought to have increased since anti-age-discrimination legislation came into force. Universities feel they cannot bar under-18s simply on the basis of their age. Various highly talented 12 and 13 year olds have, in recent years, attended university – often with much media coverage and some with unhappy results.

> Discuss the balance between academic study and the move towards independent adulthood that the university experience offers students. Is there a right age for going to university? Do students think younger teenagers who are unable to take part fully in the social life are missing out on something? Children with very high intellectual and academic abilities often spend a lot of their time with adults. Do students think they should be encouraged to spend more time with their own age group? How are they likely to be treated?

> Universities are now advised to follow child protection regulations that schools and other organisations have been used to dealing with. Do students think this is reasonable? Discuss how age-discrimination legislation has had far-reaching consequences. Do students think that encouraging under-18s to go to university was one of the intentions of the law? Discuss any other age limits that students think should be removed or altered.

The government has backed new plans to protect children from potentially harmful or inappropriate material on the internet and in video games. It says it will create a UK Council on Child Internet Safety whose job will be to keep children safe online.

The report by researcher Dr Tanya Byron backed by the government also recommends that new computers are sold with software to prevent children seeing harmful online content. Video games should have a legal classification system like that given to films that parents and children can understand.

> Game ratings already exist. Do students think they are taken seriously at the moment? Discuss the pull factors towards violent games. The controversial video game Manhunt 2 recently had a ban lifted when it was awarded an 18 certificate. Does that make it more attractive to certain people? How difficult will it be for someone under-18 to play it?

> Invite opinions about what is the most disturbing aspect of websites and computer games. Is it the violence, sexual explicitness, or some other content? What risks do people run who watch something unsuitable? Discuss how different personalities react differently to the same material. Talk about the balance of rights – the right to choose what to do versus the right to be protected from harm. The plans rely heavily on adults such as parents and teachers influencing what children do on computers. Do students think this is realistic? Talk about how much adults know about young people's online worlds.

The government has announced the publication of the first ever National Security Strategy for the United Kingdom. It highlights what it calls "the new security challenges", and how the government is responding to them. The Prime Minister Gordon Brown told parliament that "the nature of the threats and the risks we face has changed beyond recognition".

The strategy sets out how the military, police and security services are responding to all the security threats it knows about. They include terrorism, nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, international organised crime, global instability and conflict, and civil emergencies. Some of the material published was previously regarded as “highly classified” information.

> Talk about the threats to security that students know about. Which types do they feel more concerned about – for example, acts of terror or emergencies like infectious diseases or extreme weather? Does their level of concern match the real likelihood of being affected? Some of the protection measures make life more inconvenient or limit people's freedom of movement or action. Do students welcome these limits for the benefits they bring? Discuss how they can be kept in proportion.

> Last year the Government carried out an exercise to see how the UK health and emergency services would respond to a pandemic flu outbreak that killed 750,000 people. The details of  Operation Winter Willow were not widely publicised at the time. Would students have been reassured or alarmed if they had known what was going on? How do they think most people would have reacted?

News think! is one of a number of free educational services produced by the British Red Cross. You can find more resources at www.redcross.org.uk/education

Have you used these topics to raise discussions or plan classroom work? Let us know your experiences or thoughts by emailing us at reducation@redcross.org.uk