November, 16 2008, 02:13pm EDT
US: Obama Should Repudiate Bush Counterterrorism Practices
11-Step Plan Would Combat Terror and Respect Fundamental Rights
WASHINGTON
Upon taking office, President-elect Barack
Obama should decisively repudiate the abusive counterterrorism
practices of the past seven years and adopt fair and effective policy
reforms, Human Rights Watch said in a briefing paper released today.
The Human Rights Watch paper, "Fighting Terrorism Fairly and
Effectively: Recommendations for President-elect Barack Obama,"
outlines 11 steps that Obama should take to reform US counterterrorism
practices. Closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, requiring
the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to abide by the humane
interrogation rules that apply to the military, and putting an end to
renditions to torture are chief among them.
"For far too long, the United States has undermined its ability to
fight terror by adopting short-sighted policies that allowed torture
and indefinite detention without charge," said Kenneth Roth, executive
director of Human Rights Watch. "The United States urgently needs
President-elect Obama to live up to his commitment to right the wrongs
of the last seven years, and to regain the moral high ground in the
fight against terrorism."
The 28-page briefing paper urges Obama to prosecute Guantanamo
detainees suspected of terrorism in federal civilian courts and to
release or transfer the others. To start this process, he should
designate a high-level interagency task force to review the detainees'
files and decide who should be brought to trial and who should be
released.
Human Rights Watch also called on the incoming administration to
admit into the United States some of the Guantanamo detainees who have
already been slated for release but cannot be returned home because of
concern that they would be subject to torture, and to step up
negotiations with US allies around the world to find solutions for the
others.
The new president should reject calls to create a preventive
detention system in the United States as a way to "solve" the
Guantanamo problem. Such a system would have the same major defects as
the Guantanamo system, as detainees would be held without charge and
without a meaningful chance to contest the evidence against them.
Preventive detention would be based on assumptions about future
behavior that are impossible to rebut.
Human Rights Watch cautioned that any attempt to create a preventive
detention system in the United States would almost certainly embroil
the administration in controversy over detainee policy and undercut
gains made by closing Guantanamo.
Within the first days or weeks of taking office, Obama should take a
number of additional steps to signal a major shift in US
counterterrorism policy, Human Rights Watch said. Among his first acts,
he should issue an executive order requiring the CIA to follow the
humane interrogation rules adopted by the US military, announce an end
to the CIA secret detention program, and sign the Convention against
Enforced Disappearances.
Human Rights Watch also called on Obama to work with Congress to
create a non-partisan investigatory body (a truth commission) with
subpoena power to investigate abuses related to US counterterrorism
policies and practices. This commission should specifically address who
should be held accountable for these abuses and how such accountability
can be achieved. It should also make recommendations regarding what
steps should be taken to ensure that these abuses do not happen again.
"The United States must examine and account for the abuses of the
past seven years in the fight against terrorism to understand what went
wrong, and ensure that this ugly chapter in American history is never
repeated," Roth said.
The following is a full list of Human Rights Watch's recommendations to President-elect Obama on counterterrorism issues:
- Close the military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay;
- Abolish the military commissions and prosecute terrorist suspects in federal court;
- Reject preventive detention (detention without trial) as an alternative to prosecuting terrorist suspects;
- Reject the "global war on terror" as the basis for detaining terrorist suspects;
- Issue an executive order to implement the ban on torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment;
- End the CIA detention program;
- Prohibit renditions to torture;
- Account for past abuses;
- Provide redress for abuse;
- Repudiate Justice Department memos and presidential directives that permit torture and other abuses; and
- Protect innocent victims of persecution abroad from being defined as terrorists.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Floats Plan to Let Billionaire Polluters 'Bribe Their Way' Past Regulations
"He's making it official: If you write a big enough check, his administration will let you break the rules and drive up costs for working families," said one climate advocate.
Dec 11, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday floated a legally dubious proposal to let corporations and individuals who invest $1 billion or more in the U.S. bypass regulations, a scheme that environmental groups and government watchdogs said underscores the corrupt intentions of the incoming administration.
"Corporate polluters cannot bribe their way to endangering our communities and our clean air and water," Mahyar Sorour of Sierra Club said in a statement. "Donald Trump's plan to sell out to the highest bidder confirms what we've long known about him: He's happy to sacrifice the wellbeing of American communities for the benefit of his Big Oil campaign donors."
"We will keep fighting to defend our bedrock environmental protections and ensure they apply to everyone, not just those who can't afford Trump's bribe," Sorour added.
In a Truth Social post on Tuesday, Trump wrote that "any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in the United States of America, will receive fully expedited approvals and permits, including, but in no way limited to, all Environmental approvals."
"GET READY TO ROCK!!!" said Trump, who pledged on the campaign trail to accelerate oil drilling and asked the fossil fuel industry to bankroll his bid for a second White House term in exchange for large-scale deregulation.
As early as May of this year, fossil fuel industry lobbyists and lawyers had already begun crafting executive orders for Trump to sign upon retaking the White House. After winning last month's election, Trump moved quickly to stack his Cabinet with billionaires and other rich individuals with close corporate ties, including those in the fossil fuel industry.
The Associated Pressnoted Tuesday that Trump's push to let large investors evade regulations would itself likely run up against regulatory hurdles, "including a landmark law that requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impact before deciding on major projects."
"While Trump did not specify who would be eligible for accelerated approvals, dozens of energy projects proposed nationwide, from natural gas pipelines and export terminals to solar farms and offshore wind turbines, meet the billion-dollar criteria," AP noted. "Environmental groups slammed the proposal, calling it illegal on its face and a clear violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, a 54-year-old law that requires federal agencies to study the potential environmental impact of proposed actions and consider alternatives."
"Presidents have no authority whatsoever to waive statutory public health and safety protections based upon a dollar value of capital investment."
Lena Moffitt, executive director of Evergreen Action, said Tuesday that "Trump is treating America's energy policy like a cheap knickknack at an estate sale: brazenly offering to auction off our public lands and waters to the highest bidder."
"Trump's promise to fast-track environmental approvals for billion-dollar kickbacks is nothing but an illegal giveaway to fossil fuel special interests," said Moffitt, pointing to federal law requiring "rigorous review processes to protect the public interest, not rubber stamps for corporate polluters."
"Trump's plan would turn a system already rigged in favor of fossil fuel interests into one openly driven by corruption, where special interests dictate policy and everyday Americans pay the price," Moffitt added. "Now he's making it official: If you write a big enough check, his administration will let you break the rules and drive up costs for working families."
Axiosreported that Trump's specific focus on environmental regulations "will put the spotlight on Lee Zeldin," the president-elect's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
"Zeldin is considered to have little environmental policymaking experience—but is a strong supporter of Trump's broad deregulatory push," the outlet noted.
Tyson Slocum, director of the Energy Program at Public Citizen, expressed confidence that Trump's plan "will not come to pass," given that "presidents have no authority whatsoever to waive statutory public health and safety protections based upon a dollar value of capital investment."
"Trump's claim deserves ridicule for being so outlandishly illegal and wrong," said Slocum. "However, the statement does highlight Trump's utter disregard for protecting the environment or human health and the imminent peril that he and his cronies will push policies that jeopardize health, safety, and planetary well-being."
Slocum said there are other "more realistic and insidious" Trump schemes worth guarding against, including his "efforts to use national security designations to force bailouts of coal power plants during his firm term."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) warned in response to the president-elect's Truth Social post that "the Donald Trump-Elon Musk government will be of the billionaire, by the billionaire, and for the billionaire—with one set of rules for the big-money oligarchs and another set for everyone else."
"Clean air and clean water are not and will not be for sale," the senator added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
34 US Lawmakers Urge Biden to Pardon Steven Donziger
"We are deeply concerned about the chilling effect this case will have on all advocates working on behalf of other frontline communities, victims of human rights violations, and those seeking environmental justice."
Dec 11, 2024
More than 30 Democratic members of Congress on Wednesday called on outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden to pardon environmental and human rights lawyer Steven Donzinger, who endured nearly 1,000 days in prison and house arrest after successfully representing Ecuadoreans harmed by Big Oil's pollution of the Amazon rainforest.
In a
letter to Biden led by Rep. Jim McGovern, (D-Mass.), 33 House and Senate Democrats plus Independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont noted the "troubling legal irregularities" in Donzinger's case, which have been "criticized as unconstitutional or illegal by three federal judges, 68 Nobel laureates, and five high-level jurists from the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of the United Nations."
Donziger represented a group of Ecuadorean farmers and Indigenous people in a 1990s lawsuit against Texaco—which was later acquired by Chevron—over the oil company's deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of carcinogenic waste into the Amazon. He played a key role in winning a $9.5 billion settlement against Chevron in Ecuadorian courts.
However, Chevron fought Donziger in the U.S. court system, and when the attorney refused to disclose privileged client information to the company, federal District Judge Lewis Kaplan—who was invested in Chevron—held him in misdemeanor contempt of court. Loretta Preska, Kaplan's handpicked judge to preside over Donziger's contempt trial, is affiliated with the Chevron-funded Federalist Society.
Donziger's case drew worldwide attention and solidarity, with human rights experts and free speech groups joining progressive U.S. lawmakers in demanding his release. He was released in April 2022 after 993 days in prison and house arrest.
"Donziger is the only lawyer in U.S. history to be subject to any period of detention on a misdemeanor contempt of court charge," the 34 lawmakers wrote. "We believe that the legal case against Mr. Donziger, as well as the excessively harsh nature of the punishment against him, are directly tied to his prior work against Chevron. We do not make this accusation lightly or without evidentiary support."
The legislators warned:
Notwithstanding the personal hardship, this unprecedented legal process has imposed on Mr. Donziger and his family, we are deeply concerned about the chilling effect this case will have on all advocates working on behalf of other frontline communities, victims of human rights violations, and those seeking environmental justice. Those who try to help vulnerable communities will feel as though tactics of intimidation—at the hands of powerful corporate interests, and, most troublingly, the U.S. courts—can succeed in stifling robust legal representation when it is needed most. This is a dangerous signal to send.
"Pardoning Mr. Donziger," the lawmakers added, "would send a powerful message to the world that billion-dollar corporations cannot act with impunity against lawyers and their clients who defend the public interest."
The lawmakers join more than 100 environmental and human rights groups that have urged Biden to pardon Donziger.
In an April opinion piece published by Common Dreams, Donziger contended that "I need this pardon because I am the only person in U.S. history to be privately prosecuted by a corporation."
"More specifically, the government (via a pro-corporate judge) gave a giant oil company (Chevron) the power to prosecute and lock up its leading critic," he continued. "As a result of this unprecedented and frightening private prosecution, I still cannot travel out of the country and I have been prohibited from meeting with clients I have represented for over three decades. Nor can I practice law, maintain a bank account, or earn a livelihood."
"No matter where one stands on the political spectrum," Donziger added, "we should all be able to agree that what happened to me should not happen to anybody in any country that adheres to the rule of law."
The appeal for a Donziger pardon comes amid a
wave of eleventh-hour pleas from lawmakers for Biden to grant clemency to figures ranging from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden to Indigenous activist Leonard Peltier—often described as the nation's longest-jailed political prisoner—and federal death row inmates including Billie Jerome Allen, who advocates say was wrongly convicted of murder.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Supreme Court Briefs, Biden DOJ Sides With Communities Suing Big Oil
"The Justice Department has affirmed again that communities deserve their day in court to put Big Oil companies on trial for their climate lies and the resulting harms."
Dec 11, 2024
Campaigners and experts on Wednesday welcomed the Biden administration's new briefs urging the U.S. Supreme Court not to intervene in state and local lawsuits that aim to hold fossil fuel giants accountable for lying to the public about their contributions to the climate emergency.
The Tuesday filings in Sunoco v. the City and County of Honolulu and Alabama v. California align with U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar's amicus brief last year, which stemmed from Colorado communities suing Big Oil. Following that filing, the justices declined to hear five appeals from fossil fuel companies trying to shift climate liability cases from state to federal court.
The U.S. Supreme Court—which has a right-wing supermajority—asked Prelogar to weigh in again this past June and October. Her new filings have climate advocates hopeful that the justices will follow their previous path and let the cases against major polluters advance in state court.
"The Justice Department has affirmed again that communities deserve their day in court to put Big Oil companies on trial for their climate lies and the resulting harms," said Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), in a statement. "Big Oil companies are desperate to avoid facing the evidence of their deception in a courtroom, but wanting to escape the consequences for your actions is not the same thing as having the law on your side."
"As the solicitor general makes clear, there is no legal basis for the Supreme Court to intervene in these cases."
In Honolulu's case—intended to make companies including BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Shell pay for local climate damages—the Hawaii Supreme Court rejected the fossil fuel industry's argument that "state law claims alleging the deceptive marketing of fossil fuel products were either governed by the federal common law of transboundary air pollution or preempted by the Clean Air Act."
Prelogar made the case that the country's highest tribunal "does not have jurisdiction to review the Hawaii Supreme Court's interlocutory decision" that allowed Honolulu's suit to proceed, "and even if it did, further review at this time would be unwarranted."
For the other case—which involves 19 state attorneys general trying to stop climate deception suits in California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Rhode Island—Prelogar wrote that "there is no merit to the contention that the federal common law of transboundary air pollution governs (and therefore precludes) the defendant states' claims."
The solicitor general also argued that the attorneys general working on behalf of Big Oil lack standing; "the only interests directly at stake are the interests of private energy companies," not the citizens of each state; and "the very suits that the complaint seeks to enjoin are better forums for resolving the issues raised."
Alyssa Johl, vice president of legal and general counsel for CCI, said that "as the solicitor general makes clear, there is no legal basis for the Supreme Court to intervene in these cases. State and local governments are seeking to hold corporations accountable for lying about their harmful products, and state courts have the authority to hear those claims. The justices should reject these meritless requests and allow communities to have their day in court to hold Big Oil accountable."
Experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) agreed. Delta Merner, lead scientist for the group's Science Hub for Climate Litigation, said the new briefs "represent an important step in the pursuit of climate accountability" and "reaffirm that communities have the right to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for decades of misleading the public about the harms associated with their products."
"Research has shown how fossil fuel companies knowingly concealed the dangers of their products while misleading the public—a pattern of misconduct that contributed directly to today's climate crisis," she noted. "These cases seek to give communities the chance to present this evidence in court, shining a light on the broader impacts of corporate disinformation campaigns."
"We applaud the Biden administration's continued support for these lawsuits and urge the incoming Trump administration to continue following science and clear legal arguments."
Kathy Mulvey, director of the climate accountability campaign at UCS, stressed that "communities like Honolulu are bearing the financial burden of addressing climate damages, using public dollars to remediate harms caused by decades of deception by fossil fuel companies."
"A core principle of accountability is timely access to justice through the courts. Honolulu and other communities have already waited years to present their evidence and argue their claims," she added. "We applaud the Biden administration's continued support for these lawsuits and urge the incoming Trump administration to continue following science and clear legal arguments."
Honolulu's suit is just one of dozens that state and local governments have filed against the fossil fuel industry—and Prelogar's brief last year notably represented a departure from the first Trump administration's support for Big Oil. Her new briefs come as the nation prepares for President-elect Donald Trump to return to the White House next month, with a Republican-controlled Congress.
Shortly after the GOP electoral victories last month, Emily Sanders a senior reporter for the CCI project ExxonKnews, spoke with multiple legal experts who framed the courts as key to Big Oil accountability with Trump and Republican lawmakers in power.
"It's not a stretch to say the message coming from the federal executive branch writ large and large numbers of Congress is going to be climate denial and misrepresentations," said Pat Parenteau, an environmental law professor and senior fellow at Vermont Law School. "So these cases and these jury verdicts are going to be even more important to correct the record to the extent you can."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular