U.S. Cites Exception in Torture Ban

[Guest guest]

" Zepp " <zepp

Fri, 03 Mar 2006 08:04:33 -0800

[Zepps_News] In further disgrace to America, admin claims

McCain Law doesn't apply to Gitmo

 

 

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202054.\

html?nav=rss_politics/administration

 

U.S. Cites Exception in Torture Ban

McCain Law May Not Apply to Cuba Prison

 

By Josh White and Carol D. Leonnig

Washington Post Staff Writers

Friday, March 3, 2006; Page A04

 

Bush administration lawyers, fighting a claim of torture by a

Guantanamo

Bay detainee, yesterday argued that the new law that bans cruel,

inhuman

or degrading treatment of detainees in U.S. custody does not apply to

people held at the military prison.

 

In federal court yesterday and in legal filings, Justice Department

lawyers contended that a detainee at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, cannot use

legislation drafted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to challenge

treatment

that the detainee's lawyers described as " systematic torture. "

 

Government lawyers have argued that another portion of that same law,

the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, removes general access to U.S.

courts for all Guantanamo Bay captives. Therefore, they said, Mohammed

Bawazir, a Yemeni national held since May 2002, cannot claim protection

under the anti-torture provisions.

 

Bawazir's attorneys contend that " extremely painful " new tactics used

by

the government to force-feed him and end his hunger strike amount to

torture.

 

U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler said in a hearing yesterday that she

found allegations of aggressive U.S. military tactics used to break the

detainee hunger strike " extremely disturbing " and possibly against U.S.

and international law. But Justice Department lawyers argued that even

if the tactics were considered in violation of McCain's language,

detainees at Guantanamo would have no recourse to challenge them in

court.

 

In Bawazir's case, the government claims that it had to forcefully

intervene in a hunger strike that was causing his weight to drop

dangerously. In January, officials strapped Bawazir into a special

chair, put a larger tube than they had previously used through his nose

and kept him restrained for nearly two hours at a time to make sure he

did not purge the food he was being given, the government and Bawazir's

attorneys said.

 

Richard Murphy Jr., Bawazir's attorney, said his client gave in to the

new techniques and began eating solid food days after the first use of

the restraint chair. Murphy said the military deliberately made the

process painful and embarrassing, noting that Bawazir soiled himself

because of the approach.

 

Kessler said getting to the root of the allegations is an " urgent

matter. "

 

" These allegations . . . describe disgusting treatment, that if proven,

is treatment that is cruel, profoundly disturbing and violative of "

U.S.

and foreign treaties banning torture, Kessler told the government's

lawyers. She said she needs more information, but made clear she is

considering banning the use of larger nasal-gastric tubes and the

restraint chair.

 

In court filings, the Justice Department lawyers argued that language

in

the law written by Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Carl M. Levin

(D-Mich.) gives Guantanamo Bay detainees access to the courts only to

appeal their enemy combatant status determinations and convictions by

military commissions.

 

" Unfortunately, I think the government's right; it's a correct reading

of the law, " said Tom Malinowski, Washington advocacy director for

Human

Rights Watch. " The law says you can't torture detainees at Guantanamo,

but it also says you can't enforce that law in the courts. "

 

Thomas Wilner, a lawyer representing several detainees at Guantanamo,

agreed that the law cannot be enforced. " This is what Guantanamo was

about to begin with, a place to keep detainees out of the U.S.

precisely

so they can say they can't go to court, " Wilner said.

 

--

" Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government

talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court

order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about

chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order

before we do so "

-George W. Bush, April 20, 2004