Iraqi citizen takes Ministry of Defence to court 'Direct Challenge' involves 'shouting or screaming in a detainee's face' Iraqi national, Haidar Ali Hussein, argues it breaches the Geneva Convention Mr Hussein has never been personally affected by 'Direct Challenge' Sam Wordsworth QC, for the MoD, insisted the policy is lawful and 'Direct Challenge' has only been authorised six times since October last year The interrogation technique involved 'stern comments delivered at high volume and at close quarters as a verbal, short, sharp shock' The Ministry of Defence is under legal fire over a UK armed forces interrogation method - which involves shouting at captive civilians 'at close quarters'. Iraqi national, Haidar Ali Hussein, argues that the Ministry of Defence's authorised use of the controversial technique - known as 'Direct Challenge' and which involves 'shouting or screaming in a detainee's face' - breaches the Geneva Convention. Mr Ali Hussein, represented by a high-powered legal team, jumped the first hurdle in his legal campaign to ban the practice earlier this week when Appeal Court judges ruled that his complaints raised important issues that 'deserved to be considered'. Tim Owen QC and Danny Friedman QC, for Mr Ali Hussein, said the interrogation technique involved 'stern comments delivered at high volume and at close quarters as a verbal, short, sharp shock during the course of a questioning process.' Mr Owen said the method is only used on civilian captives and criticised an earlier High Court ruling that such detainees do not have the same right to hold their tongues as military personnel. 'The court wrongly held that prisoners of war enjoy a right to silence to which civilians are not entitled', he said. The technique was 'plainly coercive and deliberately so' and the QC argued it breached international law, including Article 3 of the Geneva Convention - which requires humane treatment of non-combatants. Despite amendments made to MoD policy in the wake of Sir William Gage's Baha Mousa Inquiry - a probe into the 2003 death of an Iraqi civilian in British military custody - Mr Owen said that the 'Direct Challenge' method had not been banned. Despite amendments made to MoD policy in the wake of the Baha Mousa (pictured) Inquiry - a probe into the 2003 death of an Iraqi civilian in British military custody - the 'Direct Challenge' method has not been banned He added that Mr Ali Hussein's legal team would present video footage to the court, showing 'Direct Challenge' being deployed alongside 'implied threats and insults'. Sam Wordsworth QC, for the MoD, insisted the policy is lawful and pointed out that 'Direct Challenge' has only been authorised six times since October last year. Insisting that the interrogation method was not an example of the 'same old harsh approach', she said Mr Ali Hussein's lawyers had come nowhere near proving it breached of the Geneva Convention or amounted to the criminal offence of assault. The QC added: 'The reference to the alleged history of non-compliance by UK armed services is misconceived. "Direct Challenge" was only authorized in the course of 2011 and has only been used on 12 occasions between August, 2011, and September, 2012, out of a total of just over 9,000 interrogations over the same period. Furthermore, the safeguards reduce any risk to an acceptable minimum. On Mr Ali Hussein's case, virtually any policy of permitting questioning would be deemed to now fall at risk of being unlawful.' Mr Ali Hussein - who claims he was subjected to physical and mental abuse after his arrest in 2004 - accepts he has never been personally affected by 'Direct Challenge' but insists he has 'sufficient interest' to pursue his challenge to court. Lord Justice Lloyd Jones, sitting with Lord Justice Moore-Bick, gave him permission to appeal, saying: 'I have real concerns as to whether Mr Ali Hussein has standing to bring these proceedings. However, I do consider that these proceedings give rise to issues which deserve to be considered by the full court. In saying this, I should not be taken to express the view that these are strong grounds of appeal. In so far as I grant permission to appeal, I direct that the issue of standing is determined by full court at the same hearing of the substantive appeal. No date was set for the full Appeal Court hearing of Mr Ali Hussein's case.