---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:47:38 -0500 (EST)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fixing the Torture Fix

The Nation Online
December 21, 2005
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060109/brecher

Fixing the Torture Fix

By Jeremy Brecher & Brendan
Smith

Congress passed just before Christmas legislation
allowing evidence obtained by torture to be used
against Guant?namo captives and denying them the right
to habeas corpus--the right to make the government
justify their captivity before a court. Christopher
Anders of the American Civil Liberties Union calls
these provisions "horrific precedents" that are
"counterproductive and against the rule of law."
Michael Ratner, head of the Center for Constitutional
Rights, calls it "a legal, political and moral outrage"
and "the worst thing to happen legislatively in my
history as a civil rights litigator."

This assault on the most venerable and universal of
legal principles is attached to the same legislation as
Senator John McCain's anti-torture measure. But it
provides a legal incentive to torture and blocks the
main vehicle that federal courts and human rights
advocates have used to uncover and challenge prisoner
abuse at Guant?namo.

This language fulfills one clear purpose: to prevent
courts from hearing evidence of torture, abuse and
unlawful activity. What it protects is not the security
of Americans against terrorism but the security of high
government officials against prosecution for violation
of the Anti-Torture and War Crimes Acts.

But in today's climate of growing resistance to the
abuse of presidential power--evidenced by the blocking
of Patriot Act renewal, the firestorm of outrage at NSA
domestic spying and the McCain anti-torture amendment
itself--the Bush Administration's torture cover-up may
be short-lived. Human rights groups and members of
Congress are already gearing up for the next round.

Human rights attorneys will take the Graham amendment
on in the courts. CCR's Ratner says, "We are going to
litigate the hell out of this. We have hundreds of
high-powered attorneys who work with Guant?namo cases
who are really angry." In the last few days lawyers
have filed habeas corpus petitions covering virtually
all of the detainees whose identities they have been
able to discover; 105 petitions now cover several
hundred detainees. Their lawyers will argue that under
the Supreme Court's Rasul v. Bush decision, "we can
still bring habeas corpus petitions." The result is
likely to be "years of litigation."

A second arena will be Congress. On December 14, Senate
Democrats and Republicans agreed to legislation
requiring the national defense intelligence director to
give Congress regular, detailed updates about secret US
detention sites overseas. And on December 16, the House
passed 228 to 187 a nonbinding resolution supporting
the same requirement. Missouri Representative Ike
Skelton, top Democrat on the House Armed Services
Committee, says, "Meaningful oversight must include
proper scrutiny of all US detention facilities, whether
those facilities are located on US or foreign soil."

Back in June, Senator Arlen Specter, chair of the
Senate Judiciary Committee, held the first hearings on
Guant?namo. Noting that the Constitution confers upon
Congress the power to "make Rules concerning Captures
on Land and Water," he called the Supreme Court
decisions on detainee rights a "crazy-quilt of
decisions." In August he went to Guant?namo himself. He
began drafting legislation to address the legal rights
of Guant?namo captives. He planned to hold a hearing at
Guant?namo and considered pushing for a 9/11-style
commission to investigate the situation at the prison.
Specter vehemently opposed the Graham amendment, and
said that until there is a "comprehensive approach,"
the "Judiciary Committee will still be wrestling with
these problems."

But Specter is expecting to raise the issue even
sooner--at the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation
hearings for Judge Samuel Alito. Specter intends to ask
questions like those he had planned to ask Harriet
Miers. Those include whether there should be any
limitations as to how long foreign detainees may be
held and whether someone held as an "enemy combatant"
had such rights as confronting witnesses, right to
counsel and access to classified information.

And these issues will rise again in confirmation
hearings for Paul McNulty to become Deputy Attorney
General, expected in February or March. As US Attorney
for the Eastern District of Virginia, McNulty was in
change of bringing cases against CIA officials and
other civilians for prisoner abuse. The issue: He
hasn't brought any--even in the death in captivity of
Manadel al-Jamadi, exposed by Jane Mayer in The New
Yorker, where the CIA's own investigation found a
likelihood of criminal wrongdoing. Before being
confirmed, McNulty is likely to be asked why.

Senator McCain's anti-torture legislation, while a
symbolic victory for legal limits on the government's
right to torture, includes significant loopholes.
Perhaps the biggest is the absence of an enforcement
mechanism: It provides neither criminal nor civil
penalties for violations.

Another McCain loophole was perhaps alluded to by
President Bush when he said its purpose was "to make it
clear to the world that this government does not
torture." The kicker: The legislation leaves the US
free to turn over captives to other governments and let
them engage in torture on its behalf.

The House has twice passed amendments by Representative
Edward Markey of Massachusetts that would prohibit what
the Bush Administration calls "extraordinary rendition"
and what Markey calls "the outsourcing of torture."
When the House returns for the new year, it will be
forced to vote on a Resolution of Inquiry introduced by
Markey that would require government agencies to
provide information on all prisoners subject to
extraordinary rendition.

The uproar over rendition and torture is not restricted
to the United States. United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights Louise Arbour has warned that
international human rights law has been a casualty of
the so-called war on terrorism. And while European
governments may share the hope of former German
Interior Minister Otto Schily that "at some point this
bone will be chewed bare," the issue continues to
develop a momentum among civil society and EU human
rights institutions that may make it harder to silence
at home.

The issues of torture, abuse, rendition and denial of
detainees' legal rights are becoming part of the larger
issue of unlawful extension of presidential power. In
the wake of the New York Times's disclosure that Bush
had authorized the National Security Agency to spy on
Americans, Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold said it was
indicative of a "pattern of abuse" that also included
torture and secret prisons, revealing that the
President is "grabbing too much power."

A new report called "The Constitution in Crisis: The
Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation,
Torture, Retribution and Coverups in the Iraq War,"
just released by Michigan Representative John Conyers
and the House Judiciary Committee Democrats, identifies
the White House position on the Geneva Conventions and
international law as one of the many elements for which
there is substantial evidence that top Bush
Administration officials violated federal laws. It
calls for a Resolution of Censure, a Justice Department
criminal investigation and a Select Committee to
investigate Bush Administration misconduct.

In backing the use of coerced testimony and the denial
of habeas corpus, Congress is making itself a party to
the Bush Administration's abuse of power. And it's not
just Republicans. Even some Democrats with reputations
as civil libertarians, notably Michigan Senator and
Graham amendment co-sponsor Carl Levin, supported the
changes included in the bill. Michael Ratner warned
before final passage, "If the Democrats fail to
filibuster this bill, they are complicit in selling out
the Constitution on this."

Ratner adds, "We need to litigate every single issue in
our courts, in European courts and every possible
national and international venue. But unraveling this
outlaw administration is going to take more than
courts. It is going to take almost a popular rebellion.
The way to do this is to go to every university, every
public forum, hold mock trials, street demonstrations,
for people to say: We do not believe in one-person rule
in the US." As "The Constitution in Crisis" concludes,
"It is incumbent on individual Members of Congress as
well as the American public to act to protect our
constitutional form of government."

_______________________________________________________

portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a news,
discussion and debate service of the Committees of
Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It aims to
provide varied material of interest to people on the
left.

For answers to frequently asked questions:
http://www.portside.org/faq

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change settings:
http://lists.portside.org/mailman/listinfo/portside

To submit material, paste into an email and send to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (postings are moderated)

For assistance with your account:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To search the portside archive:
https://lists.mayfirst.org/search/swish.cgi?list_name=portside

Reply via email to