DOCSLIB.ORG

The United Kingdom, Torture and Anti-Terrorism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The United Kingdom, Torture and Anti-Terrorism THE UNITED KINGDOM, TORTURE AND ANTI-TERRORISM: WHERE THE PROBLEMS LIE A report produced by The Redress Trust Registered Charity No. 1015787 December 2008 REDRESS 87 Vauxhall Walk London, SE11 5HJ www.redress.org THE UNITED KINGDOM, TORTURE AND ANTI-TERRORISM: 2 WHERE THE PROBLEMS LIE INDEX I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 II. THE UK AND ‘EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION’ ........................................................... 8 1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 8 2. RENDITION, EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION, RENDITION TO JUSTICE .............. 8 3. THE US PROGRAMME ............................................................................................... 10 4. THE PROHIBITION AGAINST TORTURE AND NON-REFOULEMENT ............... 11 5. EVIDENCE OF UK INVOLVEMENT AND THE UK RESPONSE ............................. 13 a) UK police investigation .................................................................................... 14 b) Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) .................................................. 14 c) Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) ................................................................... 16 d) Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) ................................................... 22 e) All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition (APPGER) 22 6. DEVELOPMENTS AT THE EUROPEAN UNION LEVEL .......................................... 24 7. DIEGO GARCIA ........................................................................................................... 26 8. THE NEED FOR REFORM .......................................................................................... 28 III. UK VICTIMS OF ‘THE WAR ON TERROR’ ............................................................... 32 1. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... 32 2. CONSULAR AND DIPLOMATIC PROTECTION ....................................................... 33 a) UK Nationals ..................................................................................................... 33 b) UK Residents ...................................................................................................... 38 3. ROLE OF SECURITY SERVICES .................................................................................. 41 a) The case of Martin Mubanga ............................................................................ 41 b) The cases of Jamil El Banna and Bisher Al Rawi ............................................ 42 c) The case of Binyam Mohamed Al-Habashi ..................................................... 46 4. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 49 IV. THE UK, DEPORTATIONS & DIPLOMATIC ASSURANCES ......................................... 50 1. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... 50 2. THE DOWNING STREET VIEW ON DIPLOMATIC ASSURANCES .......................... 52 3. THE SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION (SIAC) ............................. 54 4. ALGERIA ...................................................................................................................... 55 a) Case of Y .............................................................................................................. 55 b) Case of BB ........................................................................................................... 56 c) Case of G .............................................................................................................. 57 d) Case of U ............................................................................................................. 58 e) Y, BB and U in the Court of Appeal ................................................................ 59 f) SIAC reconsiders the cases of Y, BB and U ....................................................... 60 5. JORDAN ..................................................................................................................... 61 a) Case of Othman ................................................................................................. 61 b) Case of VV ........................................................................................................... 65 3 THE UNITED KINGDOM, TORTURE AND ANTI-TERRORISM: c) Othman in the Court of Appeal ....................................................................... 66 6. LIBYA .......................................................................................................................... 66 a) Cases of DD and AS ........................................................................................... 67 b) DD and AS Court of Appeal ............................................................................ 69 7. HOUSE OF LORDS APPEALS ................................................................................... 70 8. UK & DIPLOMATIC ASSURANCES AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL ................ 70 9. THE UK IN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE (COE) ...................................................... 72 10. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 72 V. FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 74 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................... 75 4 WHERE THE PROBLEMS LIE I. INTRODUCTION REDRESS is an international human rights organisation based in the United Kingdom with a mandate to assist survivors of torture to obtain justice and other forms of reparation for the harm they suffered. We work in the United Kingdom and around the world directly with survivors, their families and communities, and with a range of organisations and other actors that assist torture survivors. We take legal challenges on behalf of survivors, work to ensure that torturers are punished and that survivors and their families obtain remedies for their suffering. We also work with governments and intergovernmental bodies on legal and institutional reform aimed at preventing, prohibiting and redressing torture and advocate for the eradication of the practice of torture in all its forms. With its base in the United Kingdom, REDRESS has closely followed the development of United Kingdom policies and responses to torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment. Many of REDRESS’ clients have some connection to the United Kingdom, either as British nationals tortured whilst working or otherwise travelling abroad or as individuals who have arrived in the UK after having fled torture elsewhere, typically in the country of their nationality. Others still, have suffered torture as a direct or indirect result of the actions of UK officials. The United Kingdom government has been consistent in its stance on torture, which it has unreservedly condemned. This Report seeks to look behind the United Kingdom’s clear condemnation of torture – to the range of its policies and practices that have an impact on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, and asks two main questions: 1. Is the Government’s condemnation of torture at odds with its policies and practices? 2. Is the Government doing enough to meet its international obligations in the fight against torture, and if not, what more must be done? This Report is released on 10 December 2008, the 60th anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) “as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations.” As one of the founders of the United Nations, the United Kingdom voted in favour of this historic document, Article 5 of which sets out the unequivocal prohibition against torture: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.” Since then the UK has continued in the mainstream of states accepting the total prohibition against torture, most importantly as reflected in the UN Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) which the UK ratified twenty years ago on 8 th December 1988. The UK’s acceptance of these two key instruments, and others, in the period since the end of World War II, shows its commitment to being part of the solution to the world-wide problem of torture, rather than being part of the problem itself. Indeed, the UK has played a leading role in promoting the Optional Protocol to the UNCAT,1 and is one of the first jurisdictions to successfully prosecute an individual for torture committed in the territory of another state. 2 1 The Optional Protocol establishes a system of regular visits to places of detention in States Parties carried out by complementary international and national independent expert bodies. It also establishes a new international expert body, the UN Sub-Committee on Prevention, for this purpose. The UK ratified the Optional Protocol in 2003, becoming the first country in the EU and third country in the world to do so. It came into force on 22 June 2006. 2 Faryadi Zardad Sarwar was prosecuted and convicted in the UK in 2005 for conspiracy to commit torture and hostage taking in Afghanistan in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter I Introduction
    1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background While the word “globalization” has only started to be widely used since the late 1980s, but the phenomenon of globalization has been around for much longer time.1 The characteristics of globalization can be found in the Silk Road, which not only served as a trade route that connected Asia with Middle East, Europe, and Africa but also became a place where exchange of culture, ideas, and technology could be occurred.2 Globalization itself has broad definition, since it encompasses many trends, including international trade, telecommunications, multinational corporations, cultural exchanges, spread of ideas, flows of migration, etc. Thus, it made globalization can not be clearly defined, since the definition of globalization depends on the perspective that used to analyze it.3 However, globalization can be simply defined as the process towards a single, interdependent, and integrated world.3 Thus, the process of globalization could then be characterized by the increase of connectedness between actors in the international relations. 1Peter N. Stears, 2010, Globalization in World History, New York: Routledge, p.1. 2David Christian, “Silk Roads or Steppe Roads? The Silk Roads in World History”, Journal of World History, Vol. 11, No. 1, Accessed from JSTOR on 19th February 2012, p.1. 3Joshua S. Goldstein, John C. Pevehouse, 2009, International Relations: 8th Edition, United States: Pearson-Longman, p.19. 4Alma Kadragic, 2006, Globalization and Human Rights, United States: Chelsea House Publishers, p.6. 2 The rapid advancement of ICT during the 20th century can be credited as one of the main reasons for the rapid progression of the globalization process that occurred during that era.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 4, 2019 Special Issue on Prevent
    Issue 4, 2019 Special Issue on Prevent Co-edited by Sukhwant Dhaliwal, Rebecca Durand, Stephen Cowden Inside this issue: Feature Articles Poetry by Dean Atta Artwork on Xenofon Kavvadias Book and Conference Reviews ISSN: 2398-4139 Department of English and Comparative Literary Studies, University of Warwick Image 1: Holocauston, detail © Xenofon Kavvadias. All Rights Reserved. Feminist Dissent Feminist Dissent – Issue 4 Special Issue on Prevent Co-edited by Sukhwant Dhaliwal, Rebecca Durand, Stephen Cowden Table of Contents All artworks are by Xenofon Kavvadias. Cover Image Image 2 Editorial: A Polarised Debate – Stephen Cowden, Sukhwant Dhaliwal, Rebecca Durand (p. 1-15) Image 3 Respecting and Ensuring Rights: Feminist Ethics for a State Response to Fundamentalism Sukhwant Dhaliwal (p. 16-54) Image 4 Prevent: Safeguarding and the Gender Dimension Pragna Patel (p. 55-68) Image 5 Walking the Line: Prevent and the Women’s Voluntary Sector in a Time of Austerity Yasmin Rehman (p. 69-87) Image 6 Poetry – ‘The Black Flamingo’ Dean Atta (p. 88-90) Image 7 Feminist Dissent 2019 (4) i Feminist Dissent Safeguarding or Surveillance? Social Work, Prevent and Fundamentalist Violence Stephen Cowden and Jonathan Picken (p. 91-131) Image 8 Jihadi Brides, Prevent and the Importance of Critical Thinking Skills Tehmina Kazi (p. 132-145) Image 9 Victims, Perpetrators or Protectors: The Role of Women in Countering Terrorism Hifsa Haroon-Iqbal (p. 146-157) Image 10 Poetry – ‘I come from’ Dean Atta (p. 158-159) Image 11 The Prevent Strategy’s impact on social relations: a report on work in two local authorities David Parker, David Chapot and Jonathan Davis (p.
    [Show full text]
  • [2006] EWHC 972 (Admin) Case No: CO/10470/2005 in the SUPREME
    Neutral Citation Number: [2006] EWHC 972 (Admin) Case No: CO/10470/2005 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION DIVISIONAL COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 04/05/2006 Before : LORD JUSTICE LATHAM and MR JUSTICE TUGENDHAT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : R ON THE APPN OF BISHER AL RAWI & OTHERS Claimants - and - (1) SS FOR FOREIGN & COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS Defendants (2) THE SS FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Timothy Otty & Raza Husain (instructed by Birnberg Peirce) for the Claimants Christopher Greenwood QC, Phillip Sales & Ben Hooper (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendants Hearing dates : 22nd & 23rd March 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Judgment Lord Justice Latham : This is the judgment of the Court Introduction 1. This claim arises out of the continued detention in Guantanamo Bay of the first three named claimants by the United States authorities. None of them are British nationals, but each has been a long term resident of the United Kingdom in circumstances set out in more detail below. They claim that their connection with this country is such that they have a legitimate expectation that the British government will make a formal and unequivocal request for their return to this country, in the same way as it did in relation to British nationals, who were returned after such requests in March 2004, and January 2005. The first defendant, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, has consistently declined to make such a request, making it clear that he considers himself under no obligation to do so because these claimants are not British nationals.
    [Show full text]
  • Guantánamo and Illegal Detentions the Center for Constitutional Rights
    Guantánamo and Illegal Detentions The Center for Constitutional Rights The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. CCR uses litigation proactively to empower poor communities and communities of color; to guarantee the rights of those with the fewest protections and least access to legal resources; and to train the next generation of civil and human rights attorneys. Formed in order to work hand in hand with people’s movements, CCR has lent its expertise and support to a wide range of movements for social justice. We are dedicated to defending the right to political dissent, combating the mass incarceration of both citizens and immigrants, and fighting government abuse of power. We strive to complete the unfinished civil rights movement through targeting racial profiling and other modern-day manifestations of racial and economic oppression and through combating discrimination that is based on gender or sexuality. For decades, CCR has pushed U.S. courts to recognize international human rights and humanitarian protections – and we have had groundbreaking victories that established the principle of universal jurisdiction in this country and extended human rights standards to abuses committed by corporations and other non-government groups. Rescue the Constitution: Restore Habeas Corpus The ancient right of habeas corpus requires that anyone who is arrested must be brought before a judge, charged with a crime and have evidence brought forward against them.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonic, Infrasonic, and Ultrasonic Frequencies
    SONIC, INFRASONIC, AND ULTRASONIC FREQUENCIES: The Utilisation of Waveforms as Weapons, Apparatus for Psychological Manipulation, and as Instruments of Physiological Influence by Industrial, Entertainment, and Military Organisations. TOBY HEYS A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Liverpool John Moores University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 2011 1 ABSTRACT This study is a trans-disciplinary and trans-historical investigation into civilian and battlefield contexts in which speaker systems have been utilised by the military-industrial and military-entertainment complexes to apply pressure to mass social groupings and the individuated body. Drawing on authors such as historian/sociologist Michel Foucault, economist Jacques Attali, philosopher Michel Serres, political geographer/urban planner Edward Soja, musician/sonic theorist Steve Goodman, and cultural theorist/urbanist Paul Virilio, this study engages a wide range of texts to orchestrate its arguments. Conducting new strains of viral theory that resonate with architectural, neurological, and political significance, this research provides new and original analysis about the composition of waveformed geography. Ultimately, this study listens to the ways in which the past and current utilisation of sonic, infrasonic, and ultrasonic frequencies as weapons, apparatus for psychological manipulation, and instruments of physiological influence, by industrial, civilian, entertainment, and military organisations, predict future techniques of socio­ spatialised organisation. In chapter one it is argued that since the inception of wired radio speaker systems into U.S. industrial factories in 1922, the development of sonic strategies based primarily on the scoring of architectonic spatiality, cycles of repetition, and the enveloping dynamics of surround sound can be traced to the sonic torture occurring in Guantanamo Bay during the first decade of the twenty-first century.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorism, Counter- Terrorism and Torture
    TERRORISM, COUNTER- TERRORISM AND TORTURE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM JULY 2004 REALISED WITH FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN INITIATIVE FOR DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS The Redress Trust 87 Vauxhall Walk, 3rd Floor London, SE11 5HJ Tel: +44 (0)207 793 1777 Fax: +44(0)207 793 1719 Website: www.redress.org ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was written by Gabriela Echeverria, Legal Advisor (International), and edited by Carla Ferstman, Legal Director. REDRESS would like to express it sincere appreciation to Evelyn Sook May Yuen for her assistance in the research and preparation of this report and to Kevin Laue and Clementine Olivier for their many helpful comments on the draft of this report. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 1 PART 1. THE DISCOURSE................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 1.1. DEFINITION/NON-DEFINITION OF TERRORISM..................................................................................3 1.1.1. Defining the ‘Crime’ of Terrorism in Domestic Law .......................................................................................................4 1.1.2. Vague and Overbroad Definitions of Terrorism.............................................................................................................5 1.1.3. Defining the Crime of Terrorism: Some Principles and Guidelines of International Law ..............................................7
    [Show full text]
  • The European Angle to the U.S. Terror Threat Robin Simcox | Emily Dyer
    AL-QAEDA IN THE UNITED STATES THE EUROPEAN ANGLE TO THE U.S. TERROR THREAT Robin Simcox | Emily Dyer THE EUROPEAN ANGLE TO THE U.S. TERROR THREAT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Nineteen individuals (11% of the overall total) who committed al-Qaeda related offenses (AQROs) in the U.S. between 1997 and 2011 were either European citizens or had previously lived in Europe. • The threat to America from those linked to Europe has remained reasonably constant – with European- linked individuals committing AQROs in ten of the fifteen years studied. • The majority (63%) of the nineteen European-linked individuals were unemployed, including all individuals who committed AQROs between 1998 and 2001, and from 2007 onwards. • 42% of individuals had some level of college education. Half of these individuals committed an AQRO between 1998 and 2001, while the remaining two individuals committed offenses in 2009. • 16% of offenders with European links were converts to Islam. Between 1998 and 2001, and between 2003 and 2009, there were no offenses committed by European-linked converts. • Over two thirds (68%) of European-linked offenders had received terrorist training, primarily in Afghanistan. However, nine of the ten individuals who had received training in Afghanistan committed their AQRO before 2002. Only one individual committed an AQRO afterwards (Oussama Kassir, whose charges were filed in 2006). • Among all trained individuals, 92% committed an AQRO between 1998 and 2006. • 16% of individuals had combat experience. However, there were no European-linked individuals with combat experience who committed an AQRO after 2005. • Active Participants – individuals who committed or were imminently about to commit acts of terrorism, or were formal members of al-Qaeda – committed thirteen AQROs (62%).
    [Show full text]
  • Detention in Afghanistan and Guantánamo
    Composite statement: Detention in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal and Rhuhel Ahmed 1. All three men come from Tipton in West Midlands, a poor area with a small community of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin. The school all three attended is considered one of the worst in England. Rhuhel Ahmed and Asif Iqbal who are now both aged 22 were friends from school, although one year apart. Neither was brought up religiously but each was drawn towards Islam. Shafiq Rasul is now aged 27 and had a job working at the electronics store, Currys. He was also enrolled at the University of Central England. 2. This statement jointly made by them constitutes an attempt to set out details of their treatment at the hands of UK and US military personnel and civilian authorities during the time of their detention in Kandahar in Afghanistan in late December 2001 and throughout their time in American custody in Guantanamo Bay Cuba. This statement is a composite of the experiences of all 3. They are referred to throughout by their first names for brevity. There is far more that could be said by each, but that task is an open-ended one. They have tried to include the main features. 1 Detention in Afghanistan 3. All three men were detained in Northern Afghanistan on 28 November 2001 by forces loyal to General Dostum. They were loaded onto containers and transported to Sherbegan prison. The horrors of that transportation are well documented elsewhere and are not described in detail here. 4. According to information all three were given later, there were US forces present at the point they were packed into the containers together with almost 200 others.
    [Show full text]
  • September 2004 Urgent Action AI Index: ACT 60/017/2004
    Public September 2004 Urgent Action AI Index: ACT 60/017/2004 In Focus An insight into the stories behind UAs Guantánamo Bay – a human rights scandal Over the past year, Urgent Action letter-writers have sent over 10,000 letters of protest to US authorities on behalf of six men held under a US Military Order at the US Naval Base in Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. The conditions in which these men and other Guantánamo detainees are held are believed to have increased their susceptibility to making coerced statements – statements which, US authorities have said, will be admissible in trials by military commission. The majority of almost 600 detainees at the US military base are held in maximum security blocks in small cells, for up to 24 hours a day and with very little out-of-cell exercise time. They are also subjected to repeated interrogations sometimes for hours at a time and without the presence of a lawyer, raising fears that statements may be extracted under coercion. A first-hand account of conditions at Guantánamo emerged following the release in March 2004 of Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal and Rhuhel Ahmed, three UK citizens known as the "Tipton Three" after their small home town. They allege they were beaten, shackled in painful positions during interrogations and subjected to sleep deprivation. They also report being photographed naked and subjected to anal searches after being shackled for hours. This led them to confess to being in a video of a Bin Laden rally in Afghanistan, despite the fact that court, workplace and university records show they were in the United Kingdom when the video was shot in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Torture, Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment Of
    Center for Constitutional Rights 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 Phone: (212) 614-6464 Fax: (212) 614-6499 E-Mail: [email protected] REPORT ON TORTURE AND CRUEL, INHUMAN, AND DEGRADING TREATMENT OF PRISONERS AT GUANTÁNAMO BAY, CUBA July 2006 Center for Constitutional Rights 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 Phone: (212) 614-6464 Fax: (212) 614-6499 E-Mail: [email protected] “You are in a place where there is no law – we are the law.” U.S. military intelligence officers1 REPORT ON TORTURE AND CRUEL, INHUMAN, AND DEGRADING TREATMENT OF PRISONERS AT GUANTÁNAMO BAY, CUBA TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface..........................................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction: The Accounts from Guantánamo ........................................................................................................3 I. A Legal Black Hole..................................................................................................................................................7 A. Enemy Combatants?.......................................................................................................................................7 B. Extreme Interrogation Techniques ..................................................................................................................9 II. Beyond the Law: Guantánamo, the Geneva Conventions, and the War Crimes Act........................................10 A. Abandoning the Geneva Conventions
    [Show full text]
  • B Ack St OR Y
    b a c k s t o r y GUANTANAMO HONOR BOUND TO DEFEND FREE DOM Your behind-the-scenes look at TimeLine productions yesterday’s stories. today’s topics. message from theartistic director connection pj powers g u a n t a n a mo the play Dear Friends, how to fight a new kind of enemy tell their By Gillian Slovo Directed by Nick Bowling february 11 – m a rch 2 6, 2 0 0 6 and a new kind of war. stories as and Victoria Brittain previews 2/7 – 2/10 Welcome to the second edition of honestly as TimeLine Backstory, and thanks Recently, I’ve had a few people ask Originally produced to great journalist Victoria Brittain and nov- of their public statements. Like the possible and so much to all of you who shared if Guantanamo is a “traditional acclaim in London in 2004 and elist Gillian Slovo to create a piece tribunal plays, as Slovo explains, let you draw comments about our inaugural TimeLine history play” or more of a subsequent hit Off-Broadway, on the detentions at Guantanamo. “only the words of the real people your own edition. We’re thrilled to give a “current events play.” I guess my Guantanamo is based on inter- Over March and April of 2004, the involved could be used.” In decid- conclusions about how these you this behind-the-scenes look response is “yes” and “you betcha.” views with the families of men two interviewed former detainees ing how to structure the play, “I “current events” speak to broader at our work, and we’ll hopefully Surely, it’s increasingly apparent detained in Guantanamo Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross, Dirs. the Road To
    Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross, dirs. The Road to Guantánamo , 2006. “The ‘music treatment.’” 6 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/GREY_a_00024 by guest on 29 September 2021 Across an Invisible Line: A Conversation about Music and Torture SUZANNE G. CUSICK AND BRANDEN W. JOSEPH From the moment the use of music as a component of physical and psychological torture at U.S.-run detention centers, such as those in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, was brought to light, it has been a topic of discussion in both academic circles and the popular press. Conferences devoted to the topic of music and torture have taken place at the Human Rights Project at Bard College in New York State (2009), the Hebbel-am-Ufer in Berlin, Germany (2010), and La Virreina Centre de la Imatge in Barcelona, Spain (2010). Both the Society for Ethnomusicology and the American Musicological Society have passed resolutions condemning the use of music in interrogation techniques, and in October 2009 an alliance of prominent popular musicians, including members of Pearl Jam, Nine Inch Nails, and Rage Against the Machine, cosponsored a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) public records request filed by the National Security Archive in hopes of shedding light on the extent to which their music—and that of other groups—has been used within techniques of so-called no-touch torture. Suzanne G. Cusick, professor of music at New York University, was one of the first academic musicologists to investigate the variety of issues sur - rounding the intersection of music and torture, and her publications on the topic have been pioneering both within the discipline of musi - cology and within the humanities as a whole.
    [Show full text]