Indefensible: a Reference for Prosecuting Torture and Other Felonies

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Indefensible: a Reference for Prosecuting Torture and Other Felonies INDEFENSIBLE A Reference for Prosecuting Torture and Other Felonies Committed By U.S. Officials Following September 11th About the World Organization for Human Rights USA Human Rights USA is a Washington, DC based non-profit organization that works to interpret, effectuate, and enforce human rights responsibilities in the U.S. legal system. Using impact litigation and other legal strategies, Human Rights USA seeks to obtain justice for victims of human rights violations, hold those responsible for violations accountable, deter future violations, and ensure that U.S. laws uphold internationally recognized human rights. About the American University Washington College of Law International Human Rights Law Clinic The International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University’s Washington College of Law is one of the oldest human rights clinics in the United States. The clinic carries out its mission of client representation in a broad range of cases and projects, often with local partners, all of which share a common commitment to justice through the advancement of international human rights law, both domestically and internationally. Acknowledgments This report is the result of a multi-year collaborative effort by attorneys, law professors, clinical students, and law students including: • Human Rights USA staff, current and former: Colleen Costello (author and editor), and Allison Lefrak, Theresa Harris, Piper Hendricks, and Meredith Owen (editors). • Human Rights USA legal interns: Ari Levin (American University Washington College of Law), Charles Mark VanKirk (George Washington University Law School), Christiaan Segura (Pennsylvania State University Dickerson School of Law), Danielle Goldstone (Emory University School of Law), Denise Marie Hunter (George Washington University Law School), Ely Ross (Pennsylvania State University Dickerson School of Law), Flora Manship (Emory University International Humanitarian Law Clinic), Greg Coordes (University of Chicago Law School), Shannon Kyle (Emory University School of Law), Molly Wessel (Pepperdine University School of Law), Mustafa Ünlü (Michigan University Law School), Nadia Ben-Youssef (Boston College Law School), Nandini Rao (Emory University School of Law), Rahel Jerusalem Kifle (American University Washington College of Law), Shannon Kyle (Emory University School of Law), Stacy Tolos (Emory University School of Law), Karl Timbers (University of Toledo College of Law), Stacy Cammarano (University of Texas School of Law), Amanda Lee (University of Michigan Law School), Brenna Daugherty (American University Washington College of Law), Shaun Bokhari (Indiana University Maurer School of Law); Ilissa Mira (University of California Davis School of Law); • Student Attorneys at the American University Washington College of Law International Human Rights Law Clinic, supervised by Professor Richard J. Wilson: Michael Orlando, Nina Elisseou, Eman Hammoud, and Whitney Hayes; • Students at University of Toledo College of Law, supervised by Professor Benjamin G. Davis; Scott Aaronson, Chungjin Chung, Tracy L. Beighley, Kathleen Davis, Holly L. Hillyer, Fatema Fathnezhad, Zachary Hillyer, Jeffrey Knight, Christine Kimberly Karl Timbers; and January 2012 • The legal librarians at Michigan State University for their valuable support in research. The authors are grateful for the additional assistance of The Torture Abolition and Survivors Support Coalition (TASSC); Lawrence Velvel, Dean, Massachusetts School of Law; Meetali Jain, Project Director, South African Youth Constitutional Literacy and Service Project, Democratic Governance and Research Unit in the Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town; and Hazel Weiser, Executive Director, SALT (Society of American Law Teachers), and Laurie Blank, Director, Emory University, International Humanitarian Law Clinic; and Brian Evans for his assistance in the final compilation of this report. Human Rights USA would also like to thank Marjorie Cohn, Professor, Thomas Jefferson School of Law; Jill Flores, Psychologists for Social Responsibility; Peter Weiss, President, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy and Vice President of the Board of Directors for the Center for Constitutional Rights; Kristina Borjesson, Investigative journalist and author; and Valeria Gheorghiu, attorney, for their contributions to this report and helping to get this project off the ground. The authors are particularly grateful to David Crane, Professor of Practice, Syracuse University College of Law and Robert Goldman, Professor, American University Washington College of Law for reviewing the report and providing valuable insight and feedback that helped to shape the final drafting of this report; and Benjamin G. Davis, Associate Professor, University of Toledo College of Law and Catherine Grosso, Associate Professor, Michigan State University College of Law for their individual contributions to the report, reviewing the report and providing valuable feedback, and overseeing the students as they researched and drafted the report. DISCLAIMER This guide is intended to provide the public with a better understanding of the legal framework that prohibits torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and related human rights violations and that also demands thorough investigation and prosecution when viable allegations of these prohibited acts come to light. The report applies this legal framework to publicly available information regarding detentions and interrogations related to national security efforts following September 11, 2001. However, the legal strategies, arguments, and authority included in this guide are not exhaustive and are not broken down for each individual federal circuit. This guide should not be used as a substitute for independent legal research or in place of an individualized strategy suited to the circumstances of each case. January 2012 COPYRIGHT NOTICE All materials contained in this document are protected by United States copyright law. The right to download and store or output the materials in this document/on this site is granted for the user’s personal, noncommercial use only, and materials may not be reproduced or edited in any form. Users must preserve any copyright or other notices contained in or associated with these materials. Any other reproduction, transmission, performance, display, or editing of these materials by any means mechanical or electronic without express written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited. January 2012 Indefensible: A reference for prosecuting torture and other felonies Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................1 I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................7 II. The Attorney General Has the Authority to Appoint Special Counsel to Investigate and, Where Warranted, Prosecute Crimes Committed by United States Government Officials. ........ 20 A. Department of Justice Regulations grant the Attorney General authority to appoint Special Counsel ......................................................................................................................... 20 B. The Attorney General also has the power to delegate broad authority to a special prosecutor pursuant to the U.S. Code. ...................................................................................... 32 C. Where the subject matter of the investigation could raise serious conflict of interest issues pertaining to the DOJ, the DOJ regulations should be invoked as the appropriate source of authority for appointing Special Counsel ................................................................................. 36 III. The Orchestrated Effort by Former Top-Level Administration Officials to Implement a Detainee Interrogation Program Resulted in the Widespread, Systematic, and Unlawful Abuse and Torture of Detainees ............................................................................................................... 38 A. High-ranking members of the Bush Administration issued policies or directives authorizing detainee abuse ........................................................................................................ 39 B. Senior-level U.S. government officials set out to create a legal framework that would justify the use of unlawful interrogation tactics against detainees. .......................................... 48 C. The policies and directives issued by top U.S. government officials authorizing specific interrogation tactics were the direct cause of detainee torture, and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment...................................................................................................................82 IV. High-Ranking U.S. Government Officials Violated U.S. Domestic and International Law by Approving or Facilitating the Use of Torture and Other Forms of Human Rights Violations Against Terror Suspects ..............................................................................................................114 A. Top U.S. officials unlawfully conspired, facilitated, and directed the commission of torture and other human rights violations in violation of international law......................114 B. Top U.S. officials may also be held criminally accountable for contributing to, or conspiring to commit, crimes in violation of other U.S. federal criminal laws ...................... 117 C. Bush Administration
Recommended publications
  • Of 4 27/02/2009
    Page 1 of 4 All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition House of Commons Press release: Immediate, 26 February 2009 Andrew Tyrie calls on the Government to conduct a comprehensive inquiry into its involvement in the US rendition programme, following the MOD’s admission that people captured by UK Forces were rendered to Afghanistan for interrogation by the US. “Since the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition was created, I have made a number of specific allegations: that the UK has facilitated rendition; that Diego Garcia was used for this purpose; that our Armed Forces were dragged into rendition.” “Each of these was categorically denied. A recent MOD review of detention practices condemned as ‘baseless’ speculation that the MOD was complicit in rendition. Yet all of them have turned out to be true, confirmed in three Ministerial Statements over the past year, and a High Court judgment.” “US assurances that it does not use torture are unreliable, as the Foreign Affairs Committee concluded in its Human Rights Annual Report published last year.” “Given that all previous assurances have been baseless, we can have no confidence in the ones we are being given now. The Government must now carry out a comprehensive inquiry in order to bring closure to this sorry business.” Ends. Notes to editors The APPG has been investigating this issue since 2007. The Statement today sets out that two people, captured by UK Forces, were rendered to Afghanistan by the US: “Two individuals were captured by UK forces in Iraq. They were transferred to US detention, in accordance with normal practice, and then moved subsequently to a US detention facility in Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • Extraordinary Rendition Britain's Central Role
    Griffin 10/9/04 2:49 AM Page 34 34 Obama’s Afghan Dilemma Extraordinary Our government would have us believe that our involvement in the process known as Rendition Extraordinary Rendition is limited to two occasions on which planes carrying detainees Britain’s landed to refuel on the British Indian Ocean Territory, Diego Garcia. David Miliband has Central Role stated that the British Government expects the Government of the United States to ‘seek permission to render detainees via UK territory Ben Griffin and airspace, including Overseas Territories; that we will grant that permission only if we are satisfied that the rendition would accord with UK law and our international obligations; and how we understand our obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture’. (Taken from a statement given to the House of Commons by the Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Thursday 21 February 2008.) The use of British Territory and airspace pales into insignificance in light of the fact that it has been British soldiers detaining the victims of Extraordinary Rendition in the first place. Since the invasion of Afghanistan in the autumn of 2001, United Kingdom Special Forces (UKSF) has operated within a joint US/UK Task Force. This Task Force has been responsible for the detention of hundreds if not thousands of individuals in Afghanistan and Iraq. Individuals detained by British soldiers within this Task Force have ended up in Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp, Bagram Theatre Internment Facility, Balad Special Forces Base, Camp Nama BIAP and Abu Ghraib Prison. Whilst the government has stated its desire that the Guantanamo Bay detention camp be closed, it has remained silent over these other secretive prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • US Central Command for FY2005 – FY2007
    Description of document: FOIA CASE LOGS for: United States Central Command, MacDill Air Force Base, FL for FY2005 – FY2007 Released date: 23-August-2007 Posted date: 07-December-2007 Title of Document 2005, 2006, 2007 Log Redacted Date/date range of document: 03-February-2004 – 29-June-2007 Source of document: United States Central Command CCJ6-RDF (FOIA) 7115 South Boundary Boulevard MacDill Air Force Base, Florida 33621-5101 Email: [email protected] Voice 813-827-1810 Fax 813-827-1241 Notes: Poor image quality in original file; therefore OCR accuracy limited. The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF 7115 SOUTH BOUNDARY BOULEVARD MACDI LL AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA 33621-510 I 23 August 2007 This is a final response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for an electronic copy of the FOIA Case Logs for U.S. Central Command for FY2005, FY2006 and FY2007 to date (2 July 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Prosecuting Abuses of Detainees in U.S. Counter- Terrorism Operations
    International Center for Transitional Justice CRIMINAL JUSTICE FOR CRIMINAL POLICY: Prosecuting Abuses of Detainees in U.S. Counter- terrorism Operations An ICTJ Policy Paper November 2009 Carolyn Patty Blum, Lisa Magarrell, Marieke Wierda Cover Image: Redacted page (52) from Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Activities (September 2001-October 2003), a May 2004 Special Review by the CIA’s Office of the Inspector General. Portions of that report have been declassified through litigation by the American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations under the Freedom of Information Act. The Bush administration released a few paragraphs and lines of the report in May 2008 and the Obama administration went considerably further in an August 2009 reclassification. Regardless, this page and many others, including all of the In- spector General’s recommendations, remain classified as of this writing. Ques- tions persist about the full scope of abuses under U.S. policies on rendition, de- tention and interrogation. ICTJ’s policy paper relies on declassified information and other reporting to make the case for a thorough criminal investigation of abuses in counterterrorism policy and operations. Such an investigation must include those parts of the “dark side” still hidden from public view. CRIMINAL JUSTICE FOR CRIMINAL POLICY: Prosecuting Abuses of Detainees in U.S. Counter- terrorism Operations November 2009 An ICTJ Policy Paper Carolyn Patty Blum, Lisa Magarrell, Marieke Wierda International Center for Transitional Justice ICTJ New York 5 Hanover Square, 24th Floor New York, NY 10004 Tel + 1 917 637 3800 Fax + 1 917 637 3900 About ICTJ About the U.S. Accountability Project The International Center for Transitional Justice works The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibits Attached to Arguments on Admissibility, Declaration of Mohammed Abdullah Saleh Al-Asad, and Declaration of Zahra Ahmed Mohamed
    BEFORE THE AFRICAN COMMISSION FOR HUMAN & PEOPLES’ RIGHTS 49th ORDINARY SESSION: APRIL-MAY 2011 COMMUNICATION NO. 383/2010 In the matter between: MOHAMMED ABDULLAH SALEH AL-ASAD and DJIBOUTI EXHIBITS ATTACHED TO ARGUMENTS ON ADMISSIBILITY, DECLARATION OF MOHAMMED ABDULLAH SALEH AL-ASAD, AND DECLARATION OF ZAHRA AHMED MOHAMED EXHIBITS The United Republic of Tanzania Departure Declaration Card, 27 December 2003…….A Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, On the Record: U.S. Disclosures on Rendition, Secret Detention, and Coercive Interrogation (New York: NYU School of Law, 2008)………………………………………………………………………………..B Letter to the Attorney General of Djibouti, 31 March 2009…….….…..…….…….….…C United Nations Human Rights Council, 13th Session, Joint Study on Global Practices in Relation to Secret Detention in the Context of Countering Terrorism, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/13/42 (19 February 2010)………………………………………………………. D Republic v. Director of Immigration Services, ex parte Mohammed al-Asad (Habeas Corpus petition), High Court of Tanzania, 17 June 2004………………………………...E Amnesty International, United States of America: Below the radar- Secret flights to torture and ‘disappearance,’ 5 April 2006……………………………………………….F Prepared Remarks of Treasury Secretary John Snow to Announce Joint U.S. and Saudi Action Against Four Branches of Al-Haramain in the Financial War on Terror, JS-1107, 22 January 2004…………………………………………………………………………..G Henry Lyimo, Guardian (Dar es Salaam), Yemenis, Italians Expelled, 30 December 2003…………………………………………………………………………………...….H Roderick Ndomba, Daily News (Dar es Salaam), Dar Deports 2,367 Aliens, 30 December 2003……...……………………………..………………………………………………….I International Committee of the Red Cross, ICRC Report on the Treatment of Fourteen “High Value Detainees” in CIA Custody, 2007…………………………..……….……...J International Seismological Centre Earthquake Data…………………………………….K U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 551 the Constitution Project
    Index “24” (TV series), 253, 258, 335–36 as gateway to Guantánamo, 33–35, 65–68 519th Military Intelligence Battalion, 63, 70, 104, 107 National Directorate of Security (NDS), 23, 83, 276, 322–26 A rendition, role in, 173–74 Aamer, Shaker, 47–48 black sites, 72–74, 172–73, 177–79 Abdulmutallab, Umar Farouk (“underwear bomber”), 265, Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission 319 (AIHRC), 24, 81, 83, 322, 324, 326 Abu Ghraib, 105–8 Afifi (Nik Abd-al Rahman bin Mustapha), 255 see also al-Jamadi, Manadel; Fay Report; Miller Report; Agiza, Ahmed, 165, 172, 175, 196, 200 Taguba Report Ahmed, Ibrahim Saeed, see al-Kuwaiti changes after Abu Ghraib, 114–16 al-Ani, Ibrahim Khalid Samir, 87–88 effect on U.S. policy, 7 al-Asad, Mohammed, 194, 198 England, Lynndie, 106 Al Farooq (training camp), 60 Frederick, Ivan, 106, 108 al-Faruq, Omar, 178 Graner, Charles, 95–96, 106–9 al-Ghuraba, see Ghuraba cell medical personnel and BSCTs, 224–26 al-Hajj, Sami, 40, 47, 64, 69, 227–28, 288, 291 mental effects, 291 al Hawsawi, Mustafa, 169 physical effects, 287–88 Al-Husayn, see Abu Zubaydah reactions, 339 al-Jamadi, Manadel (“Ice Man”), 95–97, 179–80 Alberto Mora, 46 responses to death of, 21, 101, 330–31 ICRC and Christophe Girod, 51–55 al-Kuwaiti, Abu Ahmed (Ibrahim Saeed Ahmed), 245–47 setup of interrogation operations, 104–5 Allbright, Ben, 111, 277 Abu Zubaydah (Zayn Al-Abedin Muhammed Al-Husayn) Allen, John, 326 CIA’s psychological assessment, 142 Allen, Mark, 272 interrogation techniques al-Libi, Abu Faraj, 188, 245–46 and medical professionals’
    [Show full text]
  • Torture Flights : North Carolina’S Role in the Cia Rendition and Torture Program the Commission the Commission
    TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 LIST OF COMMISSIONERS 4 FOREWORD Alberto Mora, Former General Counsel, Department of the Navy 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Summary of the investigation into North Carolina’s involvement in torture and rendition by the North Carolina Commission of Inquiry on Torture (NCCIT) 8 FINDINGS 12 RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER ONE 14 CHAPTER SIX 39 The U.S. Government’s Rendition, Detention, Ongoing Challenges for Survivors and Interrogation (RDI) Program CHAPTER SEVEN 44 CHAPTER TWO 21 Costs and Consequences of the North Carolina’s Role in Torture: CIA’s Torture and Rendition Program Hosting Aero Contractors, Ltd. CHAPTER EIGHT 50 CHAPTER THREE 26 North Carolina Public Opposition to Other North Carolina Connections the RDI Program, and Officials’ Responses to Post-9/11 U.S. Torture CHAPTER NINE 57 CHAPTER FOUR 28 North Carolina’s Obligations under Who Were Those Rendered Domestic and International Law, the Basis by Aero Contractors? for Federal and State Investigation, and the Need for Accountability CHAPTER FIVE 34 Rendition as Torture CONCLUSION 64 ENDNOTES 66 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 78 APPENDICES 80 1 WWW.NCTORTUREREPORT.ORG TORTURE FLIGHTS : NORTH CAROLINA’S ROLE IN THE CIA RENDITION AND TORTURE PROGRAM THE COMMISSION THE COMMISSION THE COMMISSION THE COMMISSION FRANK GOLDSMITH (CO-CHAIR) JAMES E. COLEMAN, JR. PATRICIA MCGAFFAGAN DR. ANNIE SPARROW MBBS, MRCP, FRACP, MPH, MD Frank Goldsmith is a mediator, arbitrator and former civil James E. Coleman, Jr. is the John S. Bradway Professor Patricia McGaffagan worked as a psychologist for twenty rights lawyer in the Asheville, NC area. Goldsmith has of the Practice of Law, Director of the Center for five years at the Johnston County, NC Mental Health Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Music As Torture / Music As Weapon
    Trans. Revista Transcultural de Música E-ISSN: 1697-0101 [email protected] Sociedad de Etnomusicología España Cusick, Suzanne G. Music as torture / Music as weapon Trans. Revista Transcultural de Música, núm. 10, diciembre, 2006, p. 0 Sociedad de Etnomusicología Barcelona, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=82201011 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Music as torture/Music as weapon Revista Transcultural de Música Transcultural Music Review #10 (2006) ISSN:1697-0101 CASTELLANO Music as torture / Music as weapon Suzanne G. Cusick Abstract One of the most startling aspects of musical culture in the post-Cold War United States is the systematic use of music as a weapon of war. First coming to mainstream attention in 1989, when US troops blared loud music in an effort to induce Panamanian president Manuel Norriega’s surrender, the use of “acoustic bombardment” has become standard practice on the battlefields of Iraq, and specifically musical bombardment has joined sensory deprivation and sexual humiliation as among the non-lethal means by which prisoners from Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo may be coerced to yield their secrets without violating US law. The very idea that music could be an instrument of torture confronts us with a novel—and disturbing—perspective on contemporary musicality in the United States. What is it that we in the United States might know about ourselves by contemplating this perspective? What does our government’s use of music in the “war on terror” tell us (and our antagonists) about ourselves? This paper is a first attempt to understand the military and cultural logics on which the contemporary use of music as a weapon in torture and war is based.
    [Show full text]
  • Cageprisoners Cageprisoners
    CAGEPRISONERS BEYOND THE LAW – The War on Terror’s Secret Network of Detentions AFRICA East Africa PRISON NAME LOCATION CONTROL SITE CONDITIONS DETAINEES STATUS Unknown Unknown East African Arabic Muhammad al-Assad was taken from his - Muhammad al- Suspected speaking jailers, with home in Tanzania and was only told that Assad Proxy Detention possibly Somali or orders had come from very high sources that Facility Ethiopian accents. he should be taken. The next thing he knew he had been taken on a plane for three hours to a very hot place. His jailers who would take him for interrogation spoke Arabic with a Somali or Ethiopian accent and had been served with bread that was typical of those regions. He was held in this prison for a period of about 2 weeks during which time he was interrogated by an English-speaking woman a white western man who spoke good Arabic. 1 Egypt Al Jihaz / State Situated in Nasr State Security Many former detainees have consistently - Ahmad Abou El Confirmed Security City which is in Intelligence approximated that cells within this centre are Maati Proxy Detention Intelligence an eastern roughly four feet wide and ten foot long, with - Maajid Nawaz Facility National suburb of Cairo many packed together, and with many more - Reza Pankhurst Headquarters detainees held within a small area. A torture - Ian Nesbit room is also alleged to be close by to these cells so that detainees, even when not being tortured themselves, were privy to the constant screams of others. Abou Zabel 20 miles from State Security El Maati reports that he spent some weeks in - Ahmad Abou El Confirmed the centre of Intelligence this prison.
    [Show full text]
  • A/HRC/13/42 Asamblea General
    Naciones Unidas A/HRC/13/42 Asamblea General Distr. general 19 de febrero de 2010 Español Original: inglés Consejo de Derechos Humanos 13º período de sesiones Tema 3 de la agenda Promoción y protección de todos los derechos humanos, civiles, políticos, económicos, sociales y culturales, incluido el derecho al desarrollo Estudio conjunto preparado por el Sr. Martin Scheinin, Relator Especial sobre la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales en la lucha contra el terrorismo, el Sr. Manfred Nowak, Relator Especial sobre la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes; el Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria, representado por su Vicepresidente, el Sr. Shaheen Sardar Ali; y el Grupo de Trabajo sobre las Desapariciones Forzadas o Involuntarias, representado por su Presidente, el Sr. Jeremy Sarkin* ** Resumen El presente estudio conjunto sobre las prácticas mundiales en relación con la detención secreta en el contexto de la lucha contra el terrorismo fue preparado, en el ámbito de sus respectivos mandatos, por el Relator Especial sobre la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales en la lucha contra el terrorismo, el Relator Especial sobre la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, el Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria (representado por su Vicepresidente) y el Grupo de Trabajo sobre las Desapariciones Forzadas o Involuntarias (representado por su Presidente). Los cuatro titulares de mandatos decidieron realizar el estudio conjuntamente habida cuenta de que la conculcación de derechos que entraña la detención secreta estaba comprendida en sus respectivos mandatos y a fin de evitar la duplicación de trabajos y de que éstos se complementasen.
    [Show full text]
  • Outsourcing Intelligence in Iraq a Corpwatch Report on L-3/Titan
    OutsourcingOutsourcing IntelligenceIntelligence inin IraqIraq AA CorpWatchCorpWatch ReportReport onon L-3/TitanL-3/Titan Updated December 2008 with Recommendations from AAMNESTYMNESTY IINTERNATIONALNTERNATIONAL Outsourcing Intelligence in Iraq A CorpWatch Report on L-3/Titan Updated December 2008 with Recommendations from AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTRODUCTION 4 PART ONE: THE INTERROGATORS 6 History of L-3 6 Intelligence Contracts 6 Bad Hiring and Training Practices 7 Box: CACI’s Interrogation Contracts 8 Box: Surveillance Scandal 11 Prison Quotas 10 Task Force 145 12 PART TWO: THE TRANSLATORS 13 History of Titan 13 Translation Contracts 13 A: Human Rights Abuses 15 B: Criminal Charges: Ahmed Mehalba, Noureddine Malki, Faheem Mousa Salam 17 C: Taking Part in Combat? 18 Casualty Rate 20 Injured Workers 20 Penalizing the Company 21 CONCLUSION AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS To States and Private Military and Security SERGEANT WAINE HALEY,133RD MOBILE PUBLIC AFFAIRS DETACHMENT ON NOV. 10, 2005. ON NOV. DETACHMENT MOBILE PUBLIC AFFAIRS HALEY,133RD WAINE SERGEANT Titan translator and soldier on night raid in Tikrit. Companies Regarding Interrogation and Translation Contracting 25 Cover Photo: Prisoners working at Camp Cropper, the main U.S. detention facility in Baghdad, by Specialist Michael May (Task Force 134 — Detainee Operations), April 3, 2008. ENDNOTES 29 Introduction Prisoners grips fence at Camp Cropper, the main U.S. detention facility in Baghdad. Taken by Specialist Michael May (Task Force 134—Detainee Operations) on April 6th, 2008 hen U.S. troops or embassy officials want to (PMSC) in the United States, and is a spin-off of defense track and investigate Iraqis—such as interro- industry giants Lockheed Martin and Loral.
    [Show full text]
  • CIA Holds Young Sons of Captured Al-Qa'eda Chief
    CIA holds young sons of captured al-Qa'eda chief By Olga Craig 12:01AM GMT 09 Mar 2003 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1424123/CIA- holds-young-sons-of-captured-al-Qaeda-chief.html Two young sons of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the September 11 attacks, are being used by the CIA to force their father to talk. Yousef al-Khalid, nine, and his brother, Abed al-Khalid, seven, were taken into custody in Pakistan last September when intelligence officers raided a flat in Karachi where their father had been hiding. He fled just hours before the raid but his two young sons, along with another senior al-Qa'eda member, were found cowering behind a wardrobe in the apartment. The boys have been held by the Pakistani authorities but this weekend they were flown to America where they will be questioned about their father. Last night CIA interrogators confirmed that the boys were staying at a secret address where they were being encouraged to talk about their father's activities."We are handling them with kid gloves. After all, they are only little children," said one official, "but we need to know as much about their father's recent activities as possible. We have child psychologists on hand at all times and they are given the best of care." Their father, Mohammed, 37, is being interrogated at the Bagram US military base in Afghanistan. He is being held in solitary confinement and subjected to "stress and duress"-style interrogation techniques. He has been told that his sons are being held and he is being encouraged to divulge future attacks against the West and talk about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.
    [Show full text]