Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiActivists Seek Executive Order Banning Torture
NEW YORK - Shutting down the infamous detention centre at Guantanamo Bay is just one of a series of measures to reform U.S. counterterrorism practices being urged by the watchdog organisation Human Rights Watch (HRW).
![[]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/stoptorture1118.jpg "stoptorture1118.jpg")
In a report
released Sunday, the New York-based HRW urged President-elect Barack
Obama to quickly repudiate the abusive policies put in place by the
George W. Bush administration in its "global war on terror".
"The Obama administration is going to have a difficult task to restore America's standing in the world," Joanne Mariner, terrorism and counterterrorism programme director at HRW, told IPS. "The Bush administration's counterterrorism policies deeply damaged the reputation of the United States."
HRW's 11-step action plan -- entitled "Fighting Terrorism Fairly and Effectively: Recommendations for President-elect Obama" -- suggests how the U.S. could again become a credible leader in the fight for the global implementation of human rights.
"But it depends on how dramatically the Obama administration makes a clear break with the past," Mariner added.
According to HRW, some 250 terrorist suspects are still being held as "enemy combatants" at the military detention centre at Guantanamo Bay opened in 2002. Most of the detainees have now been in custody for nearly seven years, without charge.
As president, Obama should close the detention facility -- a step he has already pledged to take -- and establish a task force to review all the detainees' cases to determine whether they should be charged and brought to trial or released.
Also among the 11 steps is the abolition of military commissions to try suspected foreign terrorists. HRW argues that these commissions lack "basic fair trial guarantees" and that federal criminal courts were the "best-equipped" and "time tested" venues to handle terrorism cases.
Similarly, plans to legalise the indefinite preventive detention of suspected terrorists - based on "predictions of future dangerousness" -- should be rejected by Obama, HRW says.
Justifying detention without charge by classifying people as "enemy combatants" in the "war on terror", as has happened to suspects arrested in locations like Bosnia, Thailand and along the U.S.-Mexico border, should also be stopped.
HRW also condemned the use of torture and inhumane interrogation techniques by U.S. armed forces and intelligence agencies -- "including stripping detainees naked, subjecting them to extremes of heat, cold, and noise, and depriving them of sleep for long periods".
To ban these practices, which have led to the deaths of some detainees, Obama should quickly issue an executive order and repudiate legal memos issued by the Bush Justice Department and presidential directives under the outgoing administration that permit torture and other abuses.
HRW called on the new administration to redress victims of abusive counterterrorism policies -- something which has not happened so far as the victims have effectively been shut out of U.S. courts.
Above all, past abuses should be investigated, documented and publicly reported by a non-partisan commission with subpoena power, and former government officials who were responsible for some of the crimes should not be given immunity from prosecution, the group said.
Last week, Rep. Rush Holt, a Democrat from New Jersey who chairs an intelligence oversight panel, issued a statement saying that "while an executive order [to ban torture] will not remove the need for legislation on the issue," if Obama did so, it would "begin to restore our moral leadership on the issue".
Holt also expressed support for the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT), a coalition of religious groups from all over the country that is lobbying to eliminate the use of torture as a part of U.S. policy.
On Nov. 12, NRCAT held a nationwide action day with more than 50 delegations of religious leaders holding meetings with members of Congress. Thirty religious groups participated in a demonstration in front of the White House, where President Bush is spending his final days in office.
While she agreed on the need to fight terrorism, Mariner of HRW rejected many of the measures taken after the 9/11 terror attacks, emphasising that "the Bush administration entirely disregarded even basic principles of the rule of law."
"The government addressed terrorism in an extremely counterproductive way," Mariner said.
Instead of diminishing the terrorist threat, reports of human rights violations at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and elsewhere fuelled the recruitment of supporters for militant groups, which argued the U.S. was in fact leading a "war on Islam".
Asked whether she believes Obama will heed the recommendations of HRW, Mariner stressed that by voting against the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to authorise trials by military courts, "Obama has already stood up against these abuses."
The president-elect also explicitly pledged to close Guantanamo during his campaign.
"So we are confident that consistent with his message of change, his actions and his criticism, he is going to repudiate the abusive counterterrorism policies of the Bush administration," Mariner said.
35 Comments so far
Show AllPoliticians believed Democrats that they are smart
The policy of Obama would lead. to the spread of terrorism and augmentation in Iraq and the spread of drug trafficking and arms because diplomacy? with neighboring countries would be useless because of the different governmental systems and use of Iraq the yard of an account with America.
I am sure of that
Turkey declared that it could mediate between Iran and America, I mean, the sponsor of the regional first and controlling the drug trade in the world. Necessary you play is background herself as the best. A solution of whoever
interference in the affairs of other................lol
does he think the Syrian regime that he ,
could cross and continue to the logic of global openness through its Rules of the current _ I think it's an illusion
It seems that the British foreign minister is a drug trafficker was preparing a deal in the Middle East through his current tour
A government without morals and the President of without dignity this is the specifications of the Syrian regime, and I am sorry for any foreign diplomat in Syria either is anonymous or the goal of illegal does not rise by His position
and against the interest of the Syrian people
British Foreign Secretary says Syria basis in the stability of the region this is not praise ", but it means that they are behind the imbalance for the security of the region. Smart Syrian Walid Moallem, Minister for Foreign Affairs. cheating in as saying that the goal of a tour of the British minister in the Middle East to establish a partnership between London and Damascus. Is illusion and is miserable This system. Is based on the basis of terrorism and deceit in order to undermine the stability of Iraq as a system of constitutional parliamentary I am in my opinion he go the Minister to his country. He forgets that he came also is to the Middle East, in particular, "Syria and Palestine. don't did reiterate once again
If there was any justice in this world (there isn't) every president since at least Harry Truman (who initiated the creation of the modern security state here in the homeland) would be have been hung or assigned for the rest of their lives to a comfortable cell in Leavenworth. But there isn't any justice in the world and the cruelty and insanity rolls merrily along. Death, where is thy sting?
Are you including Truman? He led this country and gave the order to drop the only 2 atomic bombs, and on people. He pushed for the execution of the Rosenbergs.
I think that's what 'since at least Harry Truman' means.
I don't think Obama is the change we've been waiting for, and I don't think he'll do the right thing in this case, but this is a classic push-test scenario.
Obama has talked about closing Guantanamo, but he's also talked about putting those there on trial. There's no middle ground to be found in the illegal detention of Guantanamo prisoners for all of these years. Why does Obama pretend these guys were all terrorists attacking the United States from Afghanistan? It's absurd. Let them go and pay reparations.
The HRW action is commendable. However, why is it even necessary?
-TIA
WASHINGTON, (AFP) – A Texas grand jury has issued indictments against Vice President Dick Cheney and former attorney general Alberto Gonzalez over abuse at privately run prisons, court documents showed.
"Activists Seek Executive Order Banning Torture"
Okay. Done.
Obama:
"I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture, and I'm going to make sure that we don't torture."
Robert Litt, a former top Justice Department prosecutor in the last Democratic administration, under President Bill Clinton, said Obama should focus on moving forward with anti-torture policy instead of looking back.
Robert Litt, Former Justice Dept. prosecutor,
"Both for policy and political reasons, it would not be beneficial to spend a lot of time hauling people up before Congress or before grand juries and going over what went on," Litt said at a Brookings Institution discussion about Obama's legal policy. "To as great of an extent we can say: the last eight years are over; now we can move forward. That would be beneficial both to the country and the president, politically."
.Err, done? Not exactly. The headline requested an Executive Order not a campaign promise. I seem to recall Bush making almost exactly the same statement as Obama used....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
So much for hope and change...
Torture – Yes We Can?
Honest Rog.....Torture is not acceptable and has not been acceptable to all ethically minded people. Bush and Company have slid round this widely held assumption by redefining torture as " robust or vigorous" interrogation although waterboarding has already been declared torture in previous wars and torturers convicted for the crime.
The thought that I have with torture hopefully coming to an end under Obama is the silence of the Institutional Religions to make a fuss about some nasty unethical behaviours. Why would this be? Why so vociferous about other ethical matters but silent about torture? Perhaps they have been condemning such policy but I have not heard about it!!!! Perhaps it is not in the Ten Commandments. Perhaps they approve!!!!
When the Iraq Attack/Invasion began and after, I believe that there were coalitions of religious leaders that contacted The White House and wanted to meet with him. There was a lot of activism by ecumenical groups. But guess what? They were given short shrift, and he wasn't interested in what they had to say.
This is the way it's been during this Administration and also with the Congress. This has been the most secretive Administration we've ever had and Congress and the Media went along.
And when protests happen, they are not covered by the media and even peaceful protestors are tasered, shoved away, arrested.
As soon as fences, which seems to be the style in the last many years, were erected far from an event, and protestors or even onlookers had to go there, our right of free speech and expression was aborted. And if the protesters protest about being behind fences and try to go elsewhere, BIFF BAM BOOM.
We will know where Obama is coming from shortly. Since his field is Constitutional Law, it should be interesting. The Constitution specifically condemns/forbids "cruel and unusual punishment." That seem pretty clear.
We can only wait and see.
peace.
I will believe it when I see it STOP happening.
Obama, in his recent interview on "60 Minutes" made the statement that "American's don't torture". That statement made me flinch. That's exactly what Bush has always said in every reference to torture. Which is to say, Obama should have said, America needs to stop using torture, not "American's don't torture". Sorry, but Americans DO TORTURE...and continue to TORTURE. I am also convinced that the techniques used are mostly secret. Waterboarding is just the tip of a blood soaked iceberg. The President only knows what medieval methodologies have been employed against prisoners under the control of the US military. There's lots of methods that constitute torture...and I don't for a second believe that anyone who has used torture, would be bashful about using other more vicious techniques.
Obama is significant in only one thing, he is the first African-American President. In that one thing, there is hope. Otherwise however, he's more of the same. He may say he'll stop using extreme rendition, but members of his transition team are long supporters of this vile tactic...and vociferous advocates of it's continued use. And extreme rendition is specifically designed for exporting torture, taking it off-shore where it is harder to track the reprehensible cowardice that is torture. I find it darkly humorous when practitioners claim moral high ground because they got "assurances" from countries known to torture, that they won't torture...this time. Anyone who says that this time they won't torture, is not to be trusted, or allowed, to be in control of US prisoners, where torture can happen. If it can happen in a country that is known to torture, it will happen...and that is what the executive branch is counting on when they send someone out of US jurisdiction.
Obama's in the midst of packing his administration with long time Washington insiders from both sides of the divide. Lots of Clinton era criminals, as well as Bush era criminals. More of the same I'm afraid.
There is still the World Court in the Hague. I gave up writing to my so called "representatives" in the Senate long before the election - and have been writing to the World Court instead requesting action.
You do know of course that the court in the Hague has no jurisdiction on any of the issues here, right? The US is not a signatory of the treaty of Rome. Guantanamo is in Cuba which is also not a signatory and since the base there is leased it might come under US ownership in terms of the treaty.
The ICC is pretty firm in its rules that it only has jurisdiction in three cases: the perpetrator is from a member country of the treaty, the crime takes place in a treaty member country, or the case is referred by the UN Security Council where we have veto power.
There is no way the ICC would take the case ever under any circumstances. The case of US personnel torturing people in territory not covered by the treaty is simply not any of their business unless we refer it to them and I don't see that happening.
Nice thought though.
Do you have the address/e mail handy?
Can you print it please.
So much for hope.
I just lost it. But I am not surprised. Just look at his pre-election lack of concern on this issue. And others - I'm looking forward to hearing the 'anointers'
But I could be wrong !
Obama: Chains we can believe in.
After the binge...
...PURGE!!!
We don't need an 'Executive Order' because torture (of anyone) is both a national and an international crime. All three branches of the US government are complacent in breaking these laws but who will bring this tyrany to justice?
The Mills of God grind slowly, for what we are about to recieve may we be truly grateful.
Good for Human Rights Watch. I wonder how this will be handled though. I would like to see Obama flatly state that water-boarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, extreme temperature environments, physical abuse, guard dog attacks, simulated executions, sexual humiliation, sexual abuse of prisoners and prisoner's family members, and all the other things our military and CIA have been doing, are torture and are banned. But if he does this, essentially stating the obvious, then there will be an immediate hue and cry for prosecutions and investigations.
I would love to see investigations and prosecutions but I suspect that, in the interest of being conciliatory and bipartisan, Obama will avoid a specific definition of torture and will just issue a general order stating that we will comply with the U.S. Military Code for the treatment of prisoners, which prohibits cruel treatment. He may even mention the Geneva Convention and International law.
A push for prosecutions for torture/torture policies will probably not come from Obama. But if we push hard enough, both individually and collectively through HRW and other organizations (are you listening MoveOn?), we may eventually see justice done.
The use of torture by the CIA was stepped up considerably during the Nixon Administration with the help of Kissinger and George W. Bush's father. The whole base of power in the United States government rests upon this secret history. Until Americans begin to understand history and the abuse of power (backed up by torture, violence and crime) that the United States has perpetrated for decades, I dont have much hope that anything will change.
I remember when I was in college in the 70s the students actually thought that the Holocaust was going to teach us that - "This can never happen again". Alot of people are still delusional.
ctrl-z:Your memory is great. There are others making the case well, using their legal expertise: Michael Ratner, Center for Constitutional Rights on DemocracyNow spoke to it very recently: www.democracynow.org on the show. Marjorie Cohn has an article lower down on CD, as well as spoke on WBAI on Monday (www.wbai.org),on Hugh Hamilton's "Talk Back", show will be archived for 90 days. Cohn teaches law and has her own website: www.marjoriecohn.com She is the President of the National Lawyers Guild.
Thanks for the links.
Already advisors to President Obama are indicating there will be no investigation of agents of the United States that may have violated the law.
Fail to pursue crimes will make President Obama complicit in the same.
PK
Well, we will see. If an injustice has taken place it should be dealt with.
.Can you still doubt injustice in this matter? Seven years held in a cage, inommunicado, tortured, no charges filed, no relief in court and you doubt this is unjust? Hundreds have been released after such treatment and exactly how many have come to trial or been found guilty or even charged?
I am not accusing you, just laying out the case for action by our new President.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Couldn't agree more. Anais Nin, lovly lady. Thanks for the quote.
When you look at it:
"According to HRW, some 250 terrorist suspects are still being held as "enemy combatants" at the military detention centre at Guantanamo Bay opened in 2002. Most of the detainees have now been in custody for nearly seven years, without charge.
HRW also condemned the use of torture and inhumane interrogation techniques by U.S. armed forces and intelligence agencies -- "including stripping detainees naked, subjecting them to extremes of heat, cold, and noise, and depriving them of sleep for long periods"."
How can you be sure these suspects did anything? After Seven years of torture, sleep dep, etc etc. They'll probably walk into court and say whatever they want them to. Justice I think not.
There was an executive order issued on torture, and also covering the many crimes against humanity that this administration has committed: it is known as the Nuremberg Accords aka the Nuremberg Tribunals, and it was 1948.
HRW and related groups as well each and every citizen of the USA as well as "citizens" of other "civilized nations" (the USA has been excluded from that category for the length of its existence--but that is another story) have the obligation to see that this Administration: From top down, including the high Command of the Military are all brought to justice in the World Court for these crimes.
Without this kind of action, the USA will never have the respect of History, and will never regain any respect of the World ;and can expect to be held responsible by the world at large. This would include, and rightfully, partition and dissolution; because any "people" who would sit in judgement upon others for crimes against humanity, then exempt themselves from the same just two generations later do not deserve to exist; except as a negative example for those who may follow in the distant or even near future.
It really is that simple.
Good luck America, you really need it.