April, 13 2009, 03:59pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jen Nessel, CCR, 212 614 6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org
Veerle Opgenhaffen, NYU CHRGJ, 212 992
8186, opgenhaffen@exchange.law.nyu.
Sharon Singh, AIUSA, 202 544 0200 x 289,
ssingh@aiusa.org
Rights Groups Call on Obama to Declassify Documents on Secret Detention, Rendition, and Torture
Documents Show Bush Administration Exploited Confusion; Obscured DOD Role
NEW YORK and WASHINGTON
The Obama administration should take immediate steps
to declassify and release documents that would allow the American public
to understand the truth about the human rights violations committed as
part of the U.S. secret detention, extraordinary rendition, and coercive
interrogation programs, said three prominent human rights groups today.
The groups-Amnesty International USA (AIUSA), the Center for Constitutional
Rights (CCR), and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ)
at NYU School of Law-issued their call after receiving declassified documents
that contradict previous government documents regarding the role of the
Department of Defense (DOD) in secretly detaining individuals in the name
of national security.
The more than 2000 pages of newly released
documents from DOD and the Department of State (DOS) were obtained through
the groups' Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against multiple
government agencies, which has been ongoing since 2007. Although the documents
are heavily redacted, this particular batch suggests that the Bush administration
exploited confusion over the term "ghost detainee" to assert that it
did not hold such detainees at the same time that the CIA was operating
the so-called "High-Value Detainee" program. DOD appears to have
used four different categorizations for "ghost" detainees and asserts
in "talking points" dated 2004 that it "does not hold 'ghost' detainees"-apparently
in reference to one of these categories. The documents raise more
questions than they answer, since they do not make clear DOD's role in
holding individuals in secret and without access to the International Committee
of the Red Cross (ICRC). In light of the newly-public report by the
ICRC on the CIA's so-called "High Value Detainee" program, such questions
demand immediate answers.
"We need a full and public accounting
of the DOD's involvement in categorizing and handling 'ghost' detainees,"
said Margaret Satterthwaite, Faculty Director of the CHRGJ. "Although
the previous administration was able to hide behind this slippery vocabulary,
the Obama Administration should take all possible steps to get to the heart
of what happened. Without establishing the truth about past abuses,
the Obama Administration cannot move forward with a clean slate."
An August 2004 "Talking Points" document
on "Defining Ghost Detainees" prepared for then-Secretary of Defense
Donald H. Rumsfeld, stated that "DOD policy is to issue an internment
number [ISN, which triggers notification of detention to the ICRC]
to each detainee captured within 96 hours," and that "DOD does not hold
'ghost' detainees." In stark contrast, previously released DOD documents-apparently
created in August 2005-suggested that DOD held detainees for 14 to 30
days off the books, and admitted that "The practice of holding 'ghost
detainees' for the CIA-although limited in scope-was guided by oral,
ad hoc agreements and was the result, in part, of the lack of any specific,
coordinated interagency guidance."
"Today's disclosures confirm DOD was
deliberately confusing in public statements about its participation in
disappearing prisoners for the CIA's exploitation and engaged in willful
blindness towards the CIA's torture interrogation tactics," stated CCR
Attorney Gitanjali S. Gutierrez. "Congress's investigation
of the CIA's program must include examination of DOD personnel's role
and the efforts by high-ranking DOD officials to conceal the military's
support of the CIA program."
The documents also include an almost entirely
redacted 11-slide powerpoint entitled "Guantanamo Detention: Transfer
/ Release Progress"-which contemplates options for and obstacles to the
transfer of detainees-dated November, 29, 2006, shortly after so-called
High Value Detainees (HVDs) were transferred out of the CIA ghost detention
program to Guantanamo.
From DOS, the groups received redacted
notes from a January 27, 2004 meeting between then-Secretary of State Colin
Powell and the President of the ICRC-a meeting which took place around
the time the ICRC delivered a February 2004 report to the U.S. outlining
serious violations of international humanitarian law by the United States
with regard to detainees in Iraq. The groups also received a redacted September
24, 2004 cable describing the situation of juvenile detainees in Iraq,
which makes no reference in the unredacted portions to the concerns articulated
in the August 2004 Fay-Jones Report about abuse of juvenile detainees in
Abu Ghraib.
"President Barack Obama pledged to restore
transparency to government but very little has changed in this regard since
he took office," said Tom Parker, AIUSA Policy Director, (Counter)
Terrorism and Human Rights. "Governmental agencies continue
to drag their feet and obfuscate when addressing FOIA requests. The material
released to date hints at widespread governmental misconduct, and it is
high time officials realized that the cover up is every bit as damaging
as the crime."
AIUSA, CCR, and CHRJG filed FOIA requests
with several U.S. government agencies, including the CIA, DOD, DOS, DOJ,
and DHS beginning in 2004 and filed a lawsuit in June of 2007. Morrison
& Foerster LLP serves as co-counsel in the case. This is the second
set of documents released by DOD and DOS through the litigation.
To see the most recent documents from DOD
and DOS, as well as the prior filings and the documents previously released
through this litigation, click here.
For more information or copies of legal
filings in the case and released documents, please contact jnessel@ccrjustice.org,
opgenhaffen@juris.law.nyu.edu,
or ssingh@aiusa.org,.
For more information about the organizations
involved, please see their websites: www.ccrjustice.org,
www.chrgj.org
and www.amnestyusa.org.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Pick to Replace Lina Khan Vowed to End 'War on Mergers'
"Andrew Ferguson is a corporate shill who opposes banning noncompetes, opposes banning junk fees, and opposes enforcing the Anti-Merger Act," said one antitrust attorney.
Dec 11, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump's pick to lead the Federal Trade Commission vowed in his job pitch to end current chair Lina Khan's "war on mergers," a signal to an eager corporate America that the incoming administration intends to be far more lax on antitrust enforcement.
Andrew Ferguson was initially nominated by President Joe Biden to serve as a Republican commissioner on the bipartisan FTC, and his elevation to chair of the commission will not require Senate confirmation.
In a one-page document obtained by Punchbowl, Ferguson—who previously worked as chief counsel to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)—pitched himself to Trump's team as the "pro-innovation choice" with "impeccable legal credentials" and "proven loyalty" to the president-elect.
Ferguson's top agenda priority, according to the document, is to "reverse Lina Khan's anti-business agenda" by rolling back "burdensome regulations," stopping her "war on mergers," halting the agency's "attempt to become an AI regulator," and ditching "novel and legally dubious consumer protection cases."
Trump announced Ferguson as the incoming administration's FTC chair as judges in Oregon and Washington state
blocked the proposed merger of Kroger and Albertsons, decisions that one antitrust advocate called a "fantastic culmination of the FTC's work to protect consumers and workers."
According to a recent
report by the American Economic Liberties Project, the Biden administration "brought to trial four times as many billion-dollar merger challenges as Trump-Pence or Obama-Biden enforcers did," thanks to "strong leaders at the FTC" and the Justice Department's Antitrust Division.
In a letter to Ferguson following Trump's announcement on Tuesday, FTC Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter wrote that the document obtained and published by Punchbowl "raises questions" about his priorities at the agency mainly "because of what is not in it."
"Americans pay more for healthcare than anyone else in the developed world, yet they die younger," they wrote. "Medical bills bankrupt people. In fact, this is the main reason Americans go bankrupt. But the document does not mention the cost of healthcare or prescription medicine."
"If there was one takeaway from the election, it was that groceries are too expensive. So is gas," the commissioners continued. "Yet the document does not mention groceries, gas, or the cost of living. While you have said we're entering the 'most pro-worker administration in history,' the document does not mention labor, either. Americans are losing billions of dollars to fraud. Fraudsters are so brazen that they impersonate sitting FTC commissioners to steal money from retirees. The word 'fraud' does not appear in the document."
"The document does propose allowing more mergers, firing civil servants, and fighting something called 'the trans agenda,'" they added. "Is all of that more important than the cost of healthcare and groceries and gasoline? Or fighting fraud?"
As an FTC commissioner, Ferguson voted against rules banning anti-worker noncompete agreements and making it easier for consumers to cancel subscriptions. Ferguson was also the only FTC member to oppose an expansion of a rule to protect consumers from tech support scams that disproportionately impact older Americans.
"Andrew Ferguson is a corporate shill who opposes banning noncompetes, opposes banning junk fees, and opposes enforcing the Anti-Merger Act," said Basel Musharbash, principal attorney at Antimonopoly Counsel. "Appointing him to chair the FTC is an affront to the antitrust laws and a gift to the oligarchs and monopolies bleeding this country dry."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Once Again, Tom Cotton Blocks Bill to Shield Journalists From Betraying Sources
Responding to the GOP senator's latest thwarting of the PRESS Act, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden vowed to "keep trying to get this bill across the finish line" before Republicans take control of the Senate next month.
Dec 10, 2024
Republican U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas on Tuesday again blocked the passage of House-approved bipartisan legislation meant to shield journalists and telecommunications companies from being compelled to disclose sources and other information to federal authorities.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) brought the Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying (PRESS) Act—which would prohibit the federal government from forcing journalists and telecom companies to disclose certain information, with exceptions for terroristic or violent threats—for a unanimous consent vote.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued Tuesday that passing the PRESS Act is "more important now than ever before when we've heard some in the previous administration talk about going after the press in one way or another," a reference to Republican President-elect Donald Trump's threats to jail journalists who refuse to reveal the sources of leaks. Trump, who has referred to the press as the "enemy of the people," repeatedly urged Senate Republicans to "kill this bill."
Cotton, who blocked a vote on the legislation in December 2022, again objected to the bill, a move that thwarted its speedy passage. The Republican called the legislation a "threat to national security" and "the biggest giveaway to the liberal press in American history."
The advocacy group Defending Rights and Dissent lamented that "Congress has abdicated their responsibility to take substantive steps to protect the constitutional right to a free press."
However, Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, noted ways in which Senate Democrats can still pass the PRESS Act before Republicans gain control of the upper chamber next month:
Senate Democrats had all year to move this bipartisan bill and now time is running out. Leader Schumer needs to get the PRESS Act into law—whether by attaching it to a year-end legislative package or bringing it to the floor on its own—even if it means shortening lawmakers' holiday break. Hopefully, today was a preview of more meaningful action to come.
Responding to Tuesday's setback, Wyden vowed, "I'm not taking my foot off the gas."
"I'll keep trying to get this bill across the finish line to write much-needed protections for journalists and their sources into black letter law," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judges Block Kroger-Albertsons Merger in 'Win for Farmers, Workers, and Consumers'
"We applaud the FTC for securing one of the most significant victories in modern antitrust enforcement," said one advocate.
Dec 10, 2024
Antitrust advocates on Tuesday welcomed a pair of court rulings against the proposed merger of grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons, which was challenged by Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and multiple state attorneys general.
"The FTC, along with our state partners, scored a major victory for the American people, successfully blocking Kroger's acquisition of Albertsons," said Henry Liu, director of the commission's Bureau of Competition, in a statement. "This historic win protects millions of Americans across the country from higher prices for essential groceries—from milk, to bread, to eggs—ultimately allowing consumers to keep more money in their pockets."
"This victory has a direct, tangible impact on the lives of millions of Americans who shop at Kroger or Albertsons-owned grocery stores for their everyday needs, whether that's a Fry's in Arizona, a Vons in Southern California, or a Jewel-Osco in Illinois," he added. "This is also a victory for thousands of hardworking union employees, protecting their hard-earned paychecks by ensuring Kroger and Albertsons continue to compete for workers through higher wages, better benefits, and improved working conditions."
While Liu was celebrating the preliminary injunction from Oregon-based U.S. District Court Judge Adrienne Nelson, later Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Marshall Ferguson released a ruling that blocked the merger in Washington state.
"We're standing up to mega-monopolies to keep prices down," said Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson. "We went to court to block this illegal merger to protect Washingtonians' struggling with high grocery prices and the workers whose jobs were at stake. This is an important victory for affordability, worker protections, and the rule of law."
Advocacy groups applauding the decisions also pointed to the high cost of groceries and the anticipated impact of Kroger buying Albertsons—a $24.6 billion deal first announced in October 2022.
"American families are the big winner today, thanks to the Federal Trade Commission. The only people who stood to gain from the potential merger between Albertsons and Kroger were their wealthy executives and investors," asserted Liz Zelnick of Accountable.US. "The rest of us are letting out a huge sigh of relief knowing today's victory is good news for competitive prices and consumer access."
Describing the federal decision as "a victory for commonsense antitrust enforcement that puts people ahead of corporations," Food & Water Watch senior food policy analyst Rebecca Wolf also pointed out that "persistently high food prices are hitting Americans hard, and a Kroger-Albertsons mega-merger would have only made it worse."
"Already, a handful of huge corporations' stranglehold on our food system means that consumers are paying too much for too little choice in supermarkets, workers are earning too little, and farmers and ranchers cannot get fair prices for their crops and livestock," she noted. "Today's decision and strengthened FTC merger guidelines help change the calculus."
Like Wolf, Farm Action president and co-founder Angela Huffman similarly highlighted that "while industry consolidation increases prices for consumers and harms workers, grocery mergers also have a devastating impact on farmers and ranchers."
"When grocery stores consolidate, farmers have even fewer options for where to sell their products, and the chances of them receiving a fair price for their goods are diminished further," Huffman explained. "Today's ruling is a win for farmers, workers, and consumers alike."
Some advocates specifically praised Khan—a progressive FTC chair whom President-elect Donald Trumpplans to replace with Andrew Ferguson, a current commissioner who previously worked as chief counsel to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and as Republican counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"Today's decision is a major win for shoppers and grocery workers. Families have been paying the price of unchecked corporate power in the food and grocery sector, and further consolidation would only worsen this crisis," declared Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens in a statement.
"FTC Chair Lina Khan's approach is the blueprint to deliver lower prices, higher wages, and an economy that works for everyone," Owens argued. "The rebirth of antitrust enforcement has protected consumers against the worst of corporate power in our economy and it would be wise to continue this approach."
Laurel Kilgour, research manager at the American Economic Liberties Project, called the federal ruling "a resounding victory for workers, consumers, independent retailers, and local communities nationwide—and a powerful validation of Chair Khan and the FTC's rigorous enforcement of the law."
"The FTC presented a strong case that Kroger and Albertsons fiercely compete head-to-head on price, quality, and service. The ruling is a capstone on the FTC's work over the past four years and includes favorable citations to the FTC's recent victories against the Tapestry-Capri, IQVIA-Propel, and Illumina-Grail mergers," Kilgour continued.
"The court also cites long-standing Supreme Court law which recognizes that Congress was also concerned with the impacts of mergers on smaller competitors," she added. "We applaud the FTC for securing one of the most significant victories in modern antitrust enforcement and for successfully protecting the public interest from harmful consolidation."
Despite the celebrations, the legal battle isn't necessarily over.
The Associated Pressreported that "the case may now move to the FTC, although Kroger and Albertsons have asked a different federal judge to block the in-house proceedings," and Colorado is also trying to halt the merger in state court.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular