|
U.S. practice of prisoner
'rendering'
The Daily Star
The hypocrisy of the U.S. practice of prisoner 'rendering'
By William Fisher
Commentary by
Monday, January 17, 2005
Here is a sure-fire nomination for the most outrageous quote
of the week: "Accusations that we are torturing people tend to be
mythology." These are the words an unnamed Egyptian official
questioned by The Washington Post about prisoner abuse. However,
here are the facts of the case the paper was inquiring about. An
Egyptian-born Australian citizen, who was a prisoner at the U.S.
Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, charges that the American
government forcibly transferred him to Egypt, where he was
tortured for six months, before being returned to American
custody. He has petitioned a U.S. Federal Court to block plans to
send him back to an Egyptian prison a second time. Mamdouh
Habib alleges that while in Egyptian custody he was hung by his
arms from hooks, repeatedly shocked, nearly drowned and brutally
beaten. He contends that under American and international law he
cannot be sent back. The U.S. accuses Habib of training and
raising money for Al-Qaeda, and say he had advance knowledge of
the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in Washington and New York. Media in
Australia, however, report that in 2001 authorities there cleared
him of having terrorist connections. In a surprise announcement,
on Jan. 11 the Pentagon said it would release Habib and four
remaining British men on the grounds that "the governments of the
United Kingdom and Australia have accepted responsibility for
these individuals and will work to prevent them from engaging in
or otherwise supporting terrorist activities in the future."
Washington obviously did not want the case aired in a U.S. court.
But Habib intends to pursue his legal action against the U.S.
government. What he is challenging is a highly secret U.S.
practice: the outsourcing of torture, a practice known as
"rendering." It involves transferring detainees to countries
where there are no de facto restrictions on prisoner abuse. This
is used to obtain confessions and "intelligence" under duress, or
because there is insufficient evidence to try them in American
courts. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen are high on the list
of destinations for rendered prisoners. And for good reason.
Their alleged practices of torture and death in detention have
been widely criticized by indigenous human rights advocates for
many years, as well as by the U.S. State Department in successive
editions of its Annual Report on Human Rights. Because of a close
strategic relationship, Egypt has been a Central Intelligence
Agency favorite. According to terrorism expert Peter Bergen, a
fellow at the New America Foundation and adjunct professor at
Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International
Studies: "Egypt routinely tortures political prisoners,
untroubled by fears that other Arab leaders will seriously
condemn such actions." Human Rights Watch shares this view. In a
briefing paper entitled "Egypt's Torture Epidemic," the
organization wrote: "Torture in Egypt is a widespread and
persistent phenomenon. Security forces and the police routinely
torture or ill-treat detainees, particularly during
interrogation."
The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights in Cairo reported
that "Deaths in custody as a result of torture and ill-treatment
have shown a disturbing rise." Egyptian human rights
organizations report at least 10 cases in 2002 and seven in 2003.
There were four deaths in custody during the September-November
2003 period alone. U.S. congressional testimony confirms that the
CIA engages in rendering. However, the Bush administration says
it always seeks "diplomatic assurances" from foreign governments
that they will treat the captives humanely. However, advocacy
groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have
found that such assurances are routinely violated. According to a
memorandum filed in U.S. district court in the District of
Columbia, Habib was arrested in Pakistan in October 2001. He
claims that three Americans interrogated him over a period of
weeks, after which he was taken to an airfield where Americans
beat him. One cut off his clothes while another placed a foot on
his neck "and posed while another took pictures," the document
says. Court papers allege he was then flown to Egypt, where he
spent six months in custody. During interrogations, Habib alleges
he was suspended from hooks, with his is feet resting on the side
of a large cylindrical drum attached to wires and a battery.
"When Mr. Habib did not give the answers his interrogators
wanted, they threw a switch and a jolt of electricity" went
through the drum, it says. "The action of Mr. Habib 'dancing' on
the drum forced it to rotate, and his feet constantly slipped,
leaving him suspended by only the hooks on the wall. This
ingenious cruelty lasted until Mr. Habib finally fainted." At
other times, the petition alleges, he was placed in ankle-deep
water that interrogators told him "was wired to an electric
current, and that unless Mr. Habib confessed, they would throw
the switch and electrocute him." Habib says he gave false
confessions to stop the abuse. The legal authority for rendering
is based on an executive order signed by President Bill Clinton,
and reportedly summarized in a 2002 memo titled: "The President's
Power as Commander in Chief to Transfer Captive Terrorists to the
Control and Custody of Foreign Nations." According to The
Washington Post, "knowledgeable U.S. officials said White House
counsel Alberto R. Gonzales participated in its production."
During Gonzales's recent Senate confirmation hearings on his
nomination to be attorney general, Senator Patrick Leahy, a
Vermont Democrat, criticized the Bush administration for refusing
a congressional request to make the memo public. But an August
2002 Justice Department opinion defines torture narrowly and
concludes that the president could legally permit torture in
fighting terrorism. The Senate hearings confirmed that Gonzales
asked for and helped draft that memorandum. During his
confirmation hearing, Gonzales was asked by Senator Dick Durbin,
an Illinois Democrat, if it would be illegal for the U.S. to turn
a prisoner over to a country that would torture him. Gonzales
responded: "Under my understanding of the law, we have an
obligation not to render someone" to a country that we know
practices torture." He added: "It would be illegal if U.S.
officials were involved."
Only one other court case has challenged rendering. It was
brought by a Syrian-born Canadian citizen, Maher Arar, who claims
he was detained at New York's Kennedy Airport after arriving from
Tunisia en route to his home in Canada, and shipped off to Syria.
There, he alleges, he was imprisoned and tortured for 10 months
before being set free without charge. The case is now
pending. In continuing this obscene practice, the U.S. is once
again shooting itself in the foot. In a time when the entire
world is "wired," it is no longer possible to keep secret
operations secret for very long. Many old hands at the CIA
believe rendering to be a waste of resources, since torture
consistently yields unreliable confessions. And, while America
likes to believe it occupies the moral high ground in just about
everything; there is nothing moral about torture, whether at Abu
Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay or in Cairo, Riyadh or Sanaa.
William Fisher has managed economic development programs in
the Middle East for the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency
for International Development. He wrote this commentary for THE
DAILY STAR
|
|