Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/bklv

The Nation
3 January 2005

Prosecuting US Torture
    Editorial

Did anyone in the Bush White House cast an uneasy eye over the new
indictment of Gen. Augusto Pinochet?  It may seem over the top to mention
that old buzzard in the same breath as an elected US President. But
consider Task Force 6-26. It sounds like a relic of Pinochet's Operation
Condor, whose state-sanctioned acts of murder resulted in the dictator's
finally being brought to book after thirty years. In fact, Task Force 6-26
is a secret unit composed mostly of US Navy SEALs operating in
Baghdad--its existence unacknowledged by the Pentagon. According to the
Washington Post, a fact-finding mission for Army generals warned a year
ago that Task Force 6-26 was running an off-the-books prison for detainees
and applying more-than-moderate physical pressure--and that same task
force is implicated in two prisoner deaths. Despite those warnings, Task
Force 6-26, with its bland bureaucratic label, operates in Baghdad to this
day.

The infamous photographs of depravity at Abu Ghraib may now actually be
impeding public reckoning with the latest evidence of operations like Task
Force 6-26. The pornographic violence of Abu Ghraib could be hung on
low-level, poorly trained reservists like Lynndie England. The latest
reports trickling out of prisons in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo paint
another picture: systematic violence by trained interrogators and
systematic deceit by their bosses up the chain of command. FBI and Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA) memos released to the ACLU under the Freedom of
Information Act depict Defense Department interrogators--not "rogue"
reservists--gagging a Guantánamo prisoner with "duct tape that covered
much of his head" for reciting the Koran; squeezing a prisoner's genitalia
and bending back his thumbs; punching another's face to a pulp and leaving
beaten prisoners moaning in a fetal position on the cell floor. The
International Committee of the Red Cross reports physical and
psychological coercion "tantamount to torture," with the collusion not
just of career leg-breakers but physicians and psychologists. These
reports match in sickening detail affidavits from Camp Delta detainees
David Hicks of Australia and British national Moazzam Begg.

Critically, in the new reports the chain of evidence ends just a whisper
away from Donald Rumsfeld. In June, DIA director Vice Adm. Lowell Jacoby
complained in a letter to Stephen Cambone, Rumsfeld's under secretary for
intelligence, that two of his staffers had witnessed Special Forces in
Baghdad beating a prisoner in the face severely enough to require medical
attention. When they protested, Jacoby told Cambone, the DIA officers were
threatened and their photos of the injuries confiscated. Meanwhile, FBI
officials at Guantánamo were firing off alarmed and frustrated memos to
Washington describing beatings, the use of dogs and other "aggressive"
measures, which they found morally repugnant as well as likely to produce
"unreliable results." The agents were overruled by Guantánamo's commanders
and cautioned against too-vigorous a dissent by senior FBI officials. (No
one in Congress has asked the obvious: If, as Rumsfeld insists, it is
against US policy to torture prisoners, where did these skilled military
interrogators learn their craft?)

What can be done? That's the pressing question, since US political and
judicial institutions seem to be failing spectacularly. The CIA Inspector
General's report on the role of intelligence officers at Abu Ghraib has
yet to be released. It has been three months since the
last--superficial--Congressional hearings on prison abuse. And although
ranking Senate Judiciary Committee Democrat Patrick Leahy promises to ask
tough questions about Abu Ghraib when Alberto Gonzales comes up for
confirmation as Attorney General, that's no substitute for a proper
investigation, for which Congressional Republicans show no inclination.
Neither house has passed legislation to correct the Administration's
contorted interpretation of US war-crimes statutes and the Geneva
Conventions. Even the Supreme Court seems to have little leverage: For
months the White House has dragged its feet about scheduling Geneva
Convention prisoner-of-war status reviews demanded by the Justices,
finally establishing guilty-until-proven-innocent hearings so unfair that
a federal judge has now issued an injunction against them.

No wonder the Center for Constitutional Rights, in New York--whose bold
litigation won Guantánamo's detainees their Supreme Court recognition--has
now turned to overseas human rights laws. On behalf of four Iraqis, CCR
has appealed to Germany's federal prosecutor to initiate an inquiry under
the universal-jurisdiction doctrines of that country's war-crimes
statutes. German law--encoding that nation's revulsion at its past--allows
for the prosecution of killing, torture, cruel and inhumane treatment,
forcible transfers and sexual coercion, "even when the offense was
committed abroad and bears no relation to Germany." At this writing
prosecutors in Karlsruhe are poring over CCR's brief, and Secretary
Rumsfeld--named in the German complaint along with Cambone, Gen. Ricardo
Sanchez and others--has informed the German government that he will cancel
his planned attendance at a Munich security conference in February should
an investigation be moving forward.

As a legal doctrine, universal jurisdiction has hazards--it could easily
be manipulated as a tool for imposing US policies. But in this case, the
abuses of US military prisons are so systemic, severe and corrosive that
transnational legal intervention is amply justified--all the more so,
given US abstention from the International Criminal Court. And using
Europe's rapidly evolving human rights law to hold the United States to
what our own laws call "evolving standards of decency" follows healthy
recent precedent: When Chilean politicians maintained General Pinochet's
immunity, his victims appealed through Spanish law, leading to his 1998
arrest in London and paving the way for Chile to finally make leaders
accountable, under its own constitution, for atrocities.

After 9/11, supporters of the Bush Administration were quick to quote, in
distorted fashion, Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson's admonition that
the Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact. These latest revelations from
Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo bring Jackson to mind for different
reasons. In 1945 Justice Jackson helped to initiate the German war-crimes
tribunals, writing in a June 7 Report to the President on Atrocities and
War Crimes: "We do not accept the paradox that legal responsibility should
be the least where power is the greatest."

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to