Impunity Watch: North America

Former Gitmo Prosecutor To Testify For Hamdan

By Andrew Benfield
Senior Desk Officer, North America

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – Former chief military prosecutor of Guantanamo Bay, Colonel Morris Davis has agreed to testify as a defense witness at the military commission trial of Salim Ahmed Hamdan.  Col. Davis relinquished his prosecutorial position in October 2007 due to his growing concern over the process by which detainees are being tried. 

Salim Ahmed Hamdan has admitted to being Osama Bin Laden’s personal driver and bodyguard.  However, Hamdan denies any role in the September 11th attack.  Hamdan has been charged with conspiracy and providing support for terrorism.  Hamdan has been held at Guantanamo Bay since his capture during the invasion of Afghanistan and Hamdan has been charged under the Military Commissions Act of 2006. 

At Hamdan’s trial, Col. Davis would testify to the “political interference” that permeates the United States’ military tribunals.  Specifically, Davis recalls conversations he had with the former Pentagon general counsel William Haynes and the Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England.  Davis alleges that Haynes insisted that there be “no acquittals” in the military tribunal process.  Also, Davis says that England intentionally sought tribunal convictions in the months leading up to the 2006 midterm elections. 

Davis insists that his testimony for Hamdan has nothing to do with his “guilt or innocence.”  In fact, Davis believes that the government has a strong case against Hamdan.  His purpose for testifying is to ensure the fairness of the process.  Davis asserts that Guantanamo prisoners deserve “justice at a proceeding that is consistent with our [United States’] values.” 

Davis continues to believe in the Military Commission Act of 2006 but he insists that it is “important [for] these trials to be open and transparent.”  Davis’ testimony is his way of ensuring his ideals. 

Whether the Pentagon will allow Col. Davis to testify at Hamdan’s trial is a matter that is still unclear.  In December 2007, the Defense Department barred Col. Davis from appearing before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee. 

For more information, please see:

ABC News – Twist of Fate: Gitmo Prosecutor Could Be Defense Witness – 27 February 2008

Opinio Juris – Colonel Morris Davis to Testify, For Hamdan! – 27 February 2008

JURIST – Guantanamo Bay ex-prosecutor to testify for Hamdan defense – 27 February 2008

New Guidelines to Adjust Unfair Crack Cocaine Sentencing

By Gabrielle Meury
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States - The United States Sentencing Commission recently ruled that defendants convicted of crack cocaine offenses will be sentenced under new guidelines with lesser penalties beginning March 3. The Commission issued its plan immediately after the Supreme Court ruled in December that federal judges may hand down lighter sentences for crack defendants than those recommended by federal sentencing guidelines.

One of the immediate results of the new guidelines is that disproportionately long sentences will be reduced. Because of the reduced sentences, 1,500 crack cocaine offenders are immediately eligible to petition courts to be released from federal prisons.

The lesser penalties have been instituted in response to wide-spread criticism regarding the sentencing disparity in crack cocaine offenses. Harsh penalties were first mandated by Congress under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act. Federal crack cocaine offenders face criminal sentences that are uniquely severe compared to those imposed on other federal drug offenders. The current sentencing structure for cocaine offenses imposes five and ten year mandatory minimum sentences for threshold quantities of cocaine. Under what is commonly referred to as the “100-to-1” cocaine sentencing disparity, it takes one hundred times as much powder cocaine as crack cocaine to trigger the federal mandatory minimums. Because of the 100-to-1 differential, sentences for crack offenders are far higher than those for powder cocaine offenders who engage in equivalent conduct.

When Congress enacted the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, little was known about crack cocaine and Congress adopted uniquely severe penalties for crack offenders. Today, data reveals that the dangers of crack do not differ significantly from powder cocaine. The harsh sentencing has also had little deterrent effect on the demand or availability of the drug. As a result of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, thousands of low-level offenders have been incarcerated, putting a strain on the already overflowing federal prison population. Data from the United States Sentencing Commission reveals that in 2000, over 84 percent of federal crack defendants were African American.

For more information, please see:
New York Times- Mukasey Warns of Drug Case Releases– 8 February 2008

Washington Post- Crack Offenders Set for Release Mostly Nonviolent, Study Says- 22 February 2008

Human Rights Watch- Cracked Justice: Addressing the Unfairness in Cocaine Sentencing - 27 February 2008

Families Against Mandatory Minimums- General Mukasey: Where is your evidence on crack? - 26 February 2008

BRIEF: Castro’s Retirement Does Not Signal Relief for Political Prisoners

HAVANA, Cuba- There are an estimated 230 people imprisoned in Cuba for expressing their political beliefs. While this number is down from 283 at the end of 2006, human rights activists do not equate this decrease with political transformation. 

"Even if Castro no longer calls the shots, the repressive machinery he constructed over almost half a century remains fully intact," said Jose Miguel Vivanco, a director at Human Rights Watch, a New York based non-governmental organization.

Amnesty International declared 58 of the prisoners to be “prisoners of conscience”-teachers, journalists and human rights defenders- imprisoned for peaceful expressions of their beliefs. Amnesty also contends that the trials convicting these prisoners failed to conform to international standards of justice.

While Cuba signed the U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Amnesty declared that reform must start with the release of all prisoners of conscience and judicial review of unfair trials and the abolition of the death penalty.

For more information, please see:

Washington Post - No end to repression after Castro, activist says - 20 February 2008

Amnesty International - Cuba: reforms to human rights much needed - 19 February 2008

Nations Convene to Discuss Ban of Cluster Munitions

By Andrew Benfield
Senior Desk Officer, North America

WASHINGTON, United States – From February 18-22, 2008, more than 100 nations gathered for the Wellington Conference on Cluster Munitions in Wellington, New Zealand.  The Conference convened in an effort to draft a treaty that prohibits the “use, production, stockpiling, and trade of cluster munitions.”  Also, the treaty included provisions requiring “clearance of contaminated areas and assistance to victims.” 

Cluster munitions are weapons made up of “multiple explosive submunitions which are dispensed from a container.”  Submunitions are designed to dispense “multiple quantities from a container and detonate prior to, on, or after impact.” 

Nearly fourteen countries have used cluster munitions in at least thirty countries and areas.  In addition, thirty four countries have produced 210 different types of air-dropped and surface-launched cluster munitions while at least “thirteen countries have transferred more than 50 types of cluster munitions to at least 60 countries.”

Many of the “main users” of cluster munitions (Israel, United States and Russia) did not attend the conference.  However, over 75 percent of the present and past producers and users of cluster munitions attended the conference. 

The Wellington Conference produced a draft of a treaty on cluster munitions that 82 nations endorsed.  The treaty moved the world “closer to a ban on weapons that cause horrific civilian casualties.”  These cluster munitions casualties primarily occur in the nations of Cambodia, Laos, Lebanon and Indonesia.   

Two major humanitarian concerns arise from the use of cluster munitions: first, their explosion virtually guarantees civilian casualties when released in populated areas; second, many of the munitions fail to explode on impact and remain on the ground affective landmines. 

At the conference, there were three major attempts to weaken the treaty’s reach.  First, there was an effort to “exempt certain types of cluster munitions or technologies” from  the ban completely.  Second, there was an attempt to instate a “transition period” during which these band weapons could still be used.  Finally, there was an attempt to eliminate provisions of the treaty that prohibited nations from “assisting” other nations, not party to the treaty, with the use of cluster munitions. 

Participants in the Conference have urged voting members to “hold fast to the Wellington text” when the drafted treaty comes up for formal negotiations in Dublin, Ireland in May. 

For more information, please see:

Human Rights Watch – 82 Countries Endorse Strong Ban on Cluster Munitions – 22 February 2008

RTT News – US Rejects Accusation Of Trying To Stall Cluster Bomb Pact – 21 February 2008

Stop Cluster Munitions – Cluster Munition Coalition – October 2007

BRIEF: Guantanamo Bay Detainee Cases Face Controversy

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba- Criticism greeted the Feb. 11 announcement that Military prosecutors filed capital charges for six Guantanamo Bay detainees. Among those charged are Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the former Al Qaeda operations chief who has said he was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, and five other men who are said to be “logistical coordinators” of the attacks. The charges include conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, terrorism and providing material support for terrorism. These men will be tried in military commissions that were initially declared illegal by the Supreme Court in 2006. Congress has since set up a new version of the trials, but logistical questions still plague the proceedings. It is contested whether evidence obtained through coercive interrogations, such as waterboarding, will be admitted into the trials. Credibility of the entire process is being called into question. Three prosecutors requested to be transferred out of the Office of Military Commissions in 2004, claiming that they had been told that the process had been rigged and that they had been told by the chief prosecutor at the time that they did not need evidence to get convictions.

For more information, please see:

New York Times - Hurdles Seen as Capital Charges Are Filed in 9/11 Case - 12 February 2008

Boston Globe - Trial could put focus on interrogation - 12 February 2008

The Nation - Gitmo Trials Rigged - 20 February 2008

Department of Justice Opinions Should Not Be A Veil For Impunity

By Andrew Benfield
Senior Desk Officer, North America

WASHINGTON, United States – Early in February, CIA Director Michael Hayden released a statement that questioned the legality of the waterboarding torture method.  These torture questions were released a day after Attorney General Michael Mukasey announced that the Justice Department would not investigate waterboarding techniques used by United States interrogators following 11 September 2008. 

Jordan Paust of University of Houston Law Center and contributing editor of JURIST, has questioned Mukasey’s decision not to investigate waterboard interrogation.  Paust argues that the United States Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel’s opinions are “inconsistent with or violative of” the laws of war.  These opinions should not provide any “legal cover” for members of the executive branch who seek “impunity for alleged war crimes.” 

Specifically, Paust takes issue with the Attorney General’s waterboarding justification.  Mukasey stated, a CIA program was the subject of a “Department of Justice opinion” and was found to be “permissible.”  Paust argues that a Department of Justice opinion may never authorize the executive branch to circumvent international law. 

Citing judicial precedent dating back to the early 1800s, Paust demonstrates that the Office of Legal Counsel’s (OLC) opinions “simply cannot authorize conduct that, on its face, is criminal under international law.” 

Paust urges an investigation into the United States’ involvement in “war crimes liability” and executive branch accountability without the “veil” of the Office of Legal Counsel opinions. 

In the last seven years, no person of any nationality or status has been prosecuted for a war crime related activity. 

For more information, please see:

JURIST – Just Following Orders? DOJ Opinions and War Crimes Liability – February 2008

Associated Press – CIA Boss: Waterboarding May Be Illegal – 7 February 2008

Think Progress – Hayden: waterboarding may be illegal – 7 February 2008    

BRIEF: Human Rights Watch Criticizes Mexico's Human Rights Commission

MEXICO CITY, Mexico - Mexico's human rights record has been criticized before and now international human rights organization, Human Rights Watch, says Mexico's National Human Rights Commission ("CNDH") has not effectively used its resources to help end violations.

Jose Miguel Vivanco, the Americas Director for Human Rights Watch, says that "while the CNDH does a decent job documenting abuses and identifying problems, it doesn't take crucial steps needed to bring about change."  Some of the crucial steps Vivanco is referring to include; pressuring state institutions to hold individuals responsible for human rights abuses, promoting legal reforms to prevent future violations, challenging laws and policies that contradict with international human rights laws, sharing information it has collected on human rights problems so they are clearly known, and meeting with state officials and other human rights advocates in order to make a collective and constructive effort to promote human rights in Mexico.

Human Rights Watch gives numerous examples of human rights violations that have occurred in Mexico.  Among these violations is the abuses by soldiers involved in the new law enforcement plan to find and capture drug lords.  Impunity Watch has reported on this issue as well as other abuses Human Rights Watch refers to such as extreme action by police against demonstrators.

For more information, please see:

Human Rights Watch - Mexico:  Effective Action Needed by Human Rights Body - 13 February 2008

Human Rights Watch - Mexico's National Human Rights Commission:  A Critical Assessment

Impunity Watch - Human Rights Groups in Mexico Claim their Soldiers Have Tortured and Raped - 25 January 2008

Bush’s Africa Trip to Focus on Health, Education and Violence

By Jacob Leon Beier
Impunity Watch Editor-in-Chief

WASHINGTON, United States – Today, President Bush departed on a six-day, five country diplomatic trip to Africa.  Bush makes stops in Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana and Liberia and will meet with each country’s head of state.  This is President Bush’s second presidential tour during his tenure in office. 

President Bush is expected to draw attention to the United States’ efforts to combat widespread HIV/AIDS and malaria epidemics and improve the quality of education on the continent.

Prior to his departure, President Bush defended his decision to not send troops to the Darfur region of Sudan to prevent further acts of genocide in an interview with the BBC.  Bush argued that he did not want to mobilize US troops in another Muslim country and that China “can do more to relieve the suffering of Darfur.”  The US noted that China is currently involved in trade deals worth billions in Africa and does not inquire about the lack of democratic institutions and human rights.

President Bush will also likely have to answer questions concerning what some consider to be unfair trade practices with Africa on the part of the United States.  Critics contend that certain US trade policies “undermine struggling Africa economies.”  For example, Benin’s economy relies on its cotton exports.  But, due to the high level of government subsidies given to the US cotton industry, Benin cannot compete with US farmers.  "If George Bush comes here without something concrete to say about our everyday livelihood, he needn’t bother,” said Beninese cotton grower Ali Assi Mabdou.

President Bush called on Kenya to return to democratic rule prior to leaving on his African trip.  He made known that he would send Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to “deliver a message directly to Kenya’s leaders.”

President Bush told the BBC that he has maintained a “firm, heartfelt commitment to the continent of Africa.”  Aid to Africa has increased dramatically during Bush’s time in office.  The Bush Administration announced the development of its Millennium Challenge Account at the president’s January 28, 2008 State of the Union Address.  Bush stated. “[t]his program strengthens democracy, transparency, and the rule of law in developing nations.”  Though, critics have argued that the US Aids program is ineffective and based on moral agendas rather than policies of efficient and equitable distribution.

For more information, please see:

BBC – Bush Set for Second African Tour – 15 February 2008

Reuters – Bush’s African Visit Seen More About Strategy than Compassion – 15 February 2008

Bloomberg Press – Bush Africa Trip Touts Successes, Bypasses Places He Can’t Help – 15 February 2008

AllAfrica.com – Africa:  Bush Visit to Focus on Health, Education – 15 February 2008

The New York Times – Turmoil in Africa Alters Focus of Bush’s 5-Nation Tour – 15 February 2008

The White House – Africa Policy

Senate Votes to Ban Waterboarding

By:  Lindsey Brady
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America Desk

WASHINGTON D.C., United States - Yesterday the United States Senate passed a bill that would ban the use of waterboarding.  The House of Representatives had included similar language that prohibited waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques.  This intelligence bill comes a week after Michael Hayden, Director for the Central Intelligence Agency, acknowledged that waterboarding had been used against three suspected terrorists.  One terrorist was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who is believed to have been the mastermind behind the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.  Hayden later added, however, that it was unclear whether waterboarding was legal.

According to the Chicago Tribune, the Bush administration has insisted that waterboarding is a legal practice that can be used again "under certain circumstances" such as the presence of an imminent threat.  The Bush administration says it has not been used in the last five years and is not currently an approved interrogation technique for CIA agents.  Dana Perino, White House Press Secretary, said President Bush agrees with his advisers that the bill should be vetoed because "parts of the bill are inconsistent with the effective conduct of intelligence gathering."  The bill will limit the CIA to the 19 less aggressive interrogation techniques described in the U.S. Army's Field Manual.

The bill passed by a narrow 51-45 vote and did not meet the required 69 votes that would allow Senate to override Bush's veto.  Presidential candidate, Senator John McCain (R.-Ariz.) voted against the intelligence bill.  McCain issued a statement saying "the measure goes too far by applying military standards to intelligence agencies. He also said current laws already forbid waterboarding, and urges the administration to declare [waterboarding] illegal."  The law McCain refers to is the Detainee Treatment Act of 2006, which McCain co-sponsored, that bans military use of the interrogation technique.

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) also voted against the bill because he believes some rare situations may call for its use and he wants the option for the President to approve its use.  Lieberman said, although waterboarding can be terrifying for the subject, there is no real danger and is only a psychological experience.  According to Newsday, Lieberman believes, "we have to allow the president to allow the toughest measures to be used when there is an imminent threat to our country."  Waterboarding has been prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and many countries label it torture.

For more information, please see:

Chicago Tribune - Senate OKs Bill Banning Waterboarding - 13 February 2008

Washington Post - Senate Passes Ban on Waterboarding, Other Techniques - 14 February 2008

Newsday - Lieberman Defends Vote Against Ban on CIA Waterboarding - 14 February 2008

The Guardian - US Official Admits Waterboarding Presently Illegal - 14 February 2008

Atlantic.com - McCain:  Against Torture, But - 14 February 2008

BRIEF: Senate Votes to Allow Warrantless Wiretapping to Continue with Protection for Phone Companies

WASHINGTON D.C., United States - Today the Senate voted against amendments that would have narrowed the government's surveillance power and denied immunity to phone carriers who aided in the government.  There has been a great deal of debate over the amount of power the Bush administration should have to conduct eavesdropping programs without first obtaining a warrant.  The House of Representatives previously voted against immunity for phone companies but some Congressional officials said the House will likely adopt some type of legal protection for phone companies after the Senate and House complete negotiations in the coming week.

Under the warrantless eavesdropping program, the National Security Agency can listen into international communications by Americans where a connection to suspected terrorists can be found.  Some have found that the program is an important part of national security after the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001. Democrats, as well as Republicans support the program.  John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.V.) was quoted by the New York Times as saying, "This, I believe is the right way for the security of the nation." 

Democrats, however, lead the opposition of the warrantless wiretapping program.  Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) both lead the party opposition.  It is argued by those like Feingold and Dodd that the administration is protecting phone companies from legal action in exchange for their cooperation in eavesdropping on suspicious telephone calls.  Critics say, however, that the warrantless wiretapping violates the laws of the United States.

For more information, please see:

New York Times - Senate Moves to Shield Phone Companies on Eavesdropping   - 12 February 2008

Washington Post - Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe - 12 February 2008

Pentagon Announces Charges on 9/11 Terror Suspects

By Andrew Benfield
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States – On 11 February 2008, Pentagon officials announced charges against six Guantanamo Bay prisoners.  The charges stem from the six prisoners’ role in the 11 September 2001 attacks.  These charges are the first to stem from the attacks on 11 September 2001.  Currently the charges are being translated into each prisoner’s native language and the charges will promptly be served on them. 

In total, the Pentagon alleges 169 “overt acts” that were “allegedly committed” by the six prisoners in furtherance of the attacks.  More specifically, the principle charges advanced by the Pentagon include conspiracy, murder in violation of the laws of war, attacking civilians, destruction of property and terrorism.  Two of the charged prisoners also face the charges of hijacking or hazarding an aircraft. 

Judge Susan Crawford will preside over the initial court proceedings.  Crawford must rule on the permissibility of the prosecutor’s request to seek the death penalty.  Seeking the death penalty has raised concerns from members of the United States and the international community.  A former United States Navy attorney asserted that “trying and executing the men unfairly could make them martyrs in the eyes of extremists.” 

Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann of the Air Force, legal adviser to the Defense Department’s Office of Military Commissions assured the public that the prisoners would be “treated like members of the United States military during their judicial proceedings.”  While the proceedings will not be televised, Hartmann says that “relatively little amounts of evidence will be classified.” 

In the wake of CIA Director Michael Hayden’s acknowledgement that United States interrogators “used waterboarding in questioning Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (one of the six prisoners),” the judge of the military tribunal will have to make a controversial decision whether to allow the prosecution to used the confession elicited from the waterboarding interrogation. 

If the prisoners were convicted and sentenced to death, the military tribunal faces a greater question.  The military justice system provides for execution by lethal injection, yet Guantanamo Bay contains no death chambers at the detention facility. 

Critics feel that the death penalty will “bog down the untested system” and “amplify the attention” on cases that will already draw intense scrutiny. 

For more information, please see:

BBC News – US charges six suspects over 9/11 – 11 February 2008

USA Today – U.S. to seek death penalty for 9/11 suspects – 11 February 2008

New York Times – U.S. Charges 6 With Key Roles in 9/11 Attacks – 11 February 2008

CNN – 6 Gitmo detainees to face trial for 9/11 – 11 February 2008

BRIEF: Secret Evidence Delay Detainee Hearings

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – Defense attorneys representing those held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison have again cited their concern that the secrecy of government files, including evidence pertaining to specific terrorism suspects, is delaying the military tribunal process. 

These same attorneys have also argued that the Pentagon is withholding “potential exculpatory evidence”—restricting the right of their clients to have a fair trial before a military commission.

Pentagon lawyers have argued in response that they must maintain the secrecy of the proceedings due to security concerns, including the protection of the identities of US service members.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, the defense attorney for Omar Khadr, a Guanatanamo detainee held since the age of 15, commented on the situation, “We’re going to have to see how willing the judges are to interpret the rules so as to give defense counsel some kind of chance to actually defend their clients.”

For more information, please see:

Yahoo News – Secret Evidence Bogs Down Gitmo Hearings – 9 February 2008

BRIEF: U.N. Human Rights Official Says Waterboarding is Torture

MEXICO CITY, Mexico - Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights was asked at a press conference in Mexico City yesterday whether U.S. officials could be tried for the use of waterboarding.  The question gave reference to CIA director, Michael Hayden's comments to Congress on February 5th, 2008 that the CIA had used the interrogation technique on three detainees post 9/11.  In response to the question, the U.N. official stated that she "would have no problems with describing this practice as falling under the prohibition of torture" according to Yahoo! News.

The United States Congress has been pushed to ban waterboarding more recently due to the news concerning CIA videotapes showing the interrogation technique being used by the agency.  Waterboarding involves the restrained detainee having water poured into their airways giving the sensation of drowning.  Arbour said that the U.N's convention of Torture is meant to prosecute violators as war criminals under a "universal jurisdiction."  Arbour made historical reference to the dictator Augusto Pinochet of Chile who had been charged with, among other things, torture including waterboarding against political prisoners under his control before he died in 2006.

For more information, please see:

Yahoo! News - U.N. Says Waterboarding Should be Prosecuted as Torture - 8 February 2008

United Nations - Convention Against Torture - 4 February 1985

Demonstrators Protest F.B.I. Subpoenas of Puerto Ricans

By:  Lindsey Brady
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - More than 1,500 demonstrators in Puerto Rico and 500 in New York City protested in front of Federal Court Houses in January.  The groups were mainly Puerto Ricans who were calling out against recent subpoenas issued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") claiming it is akin to a "witch hunt" of those supporting the independence movement in Puerto Rico.  Workers World online quoted some of the protesters  as chanting "Filberto lives, the struggle continues!"

The chanting refers to Filiberto Ojeda Rios.  According to an FBI press release posted in 2006, Filiberto Ojeda Rios was the leader of the "Macheteros" until 2005 when he was shot dead in a confrontation with the F.B.I.  Many of the protesters were also chanting, "FBI:  terrorists, assassins, imperialists."  Many Puerto Ricans who favor the independence movement believe the FBI assassinated Rios in order to suppress a defiant group.  The FBI press release was issued in response to an investigation of the shooting conducted by the Office of the Inspector General who concluded the shooting was within the rights of the FBI.

The FBI reports in its press release that the Macheteros organization is a violent Puerto Rican organization that claimed the credit for bombings, robberies, and murders including the killing of American Navy sailors in Puerto Rico in 1972 and 1982.  The FBI claims Ojeda Rios was a federal fugitive having been convicted for his participation in a bank robbery in Connecticut and was tracked down in connection with his fugitive status.  The Office of Inspector General found evidence that the shoot out that resulted in Ojeda Rios' death was started after Ojeda Rios opened fire and shot multiple agents.  The FBI says "Ojeda Rios had always publicly stated the goal of the Macheteros organization was to obtain Puerto Rico's independence by armed conflict against the U.S. government."  In Puerto Rico there was great public outrage following Ojeda Rios' death.

The recent protests recalled Ojeda Rios' shooting death after the FBI issued four subpoenas for Puerto Ricans to come before a grand jury in what many believe is an attempt to investigate more into Macheteros.  Workers World Online claims that right after the subpoenas were issued, a new movement in New York, called the Hostos Jan. 11 Grand Jury Resistance Campaign ("Resistance") was organized.  The Resistance is calling for there to be no cooperation with the U.S. authorities and stated the United States is oppressing pro-independence Puerto Ricans violates international law.  The organization points, for example, to Article 1514 of the United Nations Charter.  This section of the Charter states "that the subjection of a people b foreign subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denigration of fundamental human rights...and any such people have a right to resist that foreign domination."

Macheteros still exists without Ojeda Rios and according to Prensa Latina, the pro-independence group claimed "the true reason for persecution against the Macheteros and pro-independence fighters in general is that we are a force capable of educating and organizing people."

For more information please see:

Prensa Latina - Puerto Rico Left Calls to Avoid FBI - 11 January 2008

FBI Press Release - FBI Responds to OIG Report on the Circumstances Surrounding the Attempted Capture of Filiberto Ojeda Rios - 9 August 2006

Workers World - FBI Launches new Attack on Puerto Rican Movement - 17 January 2008

Alternet - FBI Witch Hunt Stokes Puerto Rican Independence Movement - 31 January 2008

BRIEF: Attorney General Rejects Waterboarding Investigation

WASHINGTON, United States – Recent Attorney General appointee, Michael Mukasey, said today that he would not pursue a criminal probe into the CIA’s use of the controversial interrogation technique, waterboarding. 

Mukasey stated, “Whatever was done as part of a CIA program at the time that it was done was the subject of a Department of Justice opinion through the Office of Legal Counsel and was found to be permissible under the law as it existed then.”

The CIA has recently admitted that it waterboarded three suspected al-Qa’ida members. 

Also today, Vice President Cheney  “vigorously defended” the use of waterboarding in the War on Terror, saying that this technique was required as “a tougher program, for tougher customers.”  Cheney’s defense comes at the same time that CIA Director, Michael Hayden, cast doubt on the legality of waterboarding.

For more information, please see:

USA Today – Mukasey: No Criminal Probe into CIA’s use of Waterboarding on Terror Suspects – 7 February 2008

AP – CIA Boss: Waterboarding May be Illegal – 7 February 2008

The New York Times – Cheney Defends Use of Harsh Interrogations – 7 February 2007

Belfast Telegraph - CIA Admits Water-Boarding al-Qa’ida Suspects – 6 February 2008

BRIEF: First Prisoner To Die of Natural Causes At Guantanamo Bay Draws Renewed Criticism of Military Tribunals

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – In December 2007, Abdul Razzaq Hekmati became the first prisoner at Guantanamo Bay to die of natural causes.  Hekmati was held at Guantanamo Bay for nearly five years after his arrest by American forces in Afghanistan.  Afghan officials allege that American forces erroneously detained Hekmati when enemies of Hekmati accused him of being a Taliban leader. 

Officials in Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government maintain that Hekmati was not a member of the Taliban; rather, they assert that Hekmati was a hero who resisted the Russian occupation in the 1980s and the Taliban government in 1999.  Most notably, Afghan officials say that Hekmati “organized a prison break of three opponents of the Taliban.”

Hekmati’s death renews questions of detainee rights inside Guantanamo Bay.  Specifically, Afghan officials complained that Hekmati’s tribunal was “effectively thwarted from calling witnesses in [his] defense.” 

Currently Guantanamo houses 275 detainees and at least 180 of these prisoners have attempted to challenge their detention in some form. 

For more information, please see:

The New York Times – Time Runs Out for an Afghan Held by the U.S. – 5 February 2008

Impunity Watch – Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Favors Closing Guantanamo – 15 January 2008

Impunity Watch – BRIEF: Guantanamo Inmates Were Denied Investigation into Destroyed CIA Tapes – 9 January 2008

BRIEF: Rising Food Prices Force Haitian Poor To Eat Dirt Cookies

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti – In the wake of increased food prices, Haiti’s poor has been reduced to eating “cookies” made of dried yellow dirt, salt and vegetable shortening.  The dirt recipe is a traditional Haitian remedy for hunger pains mostly used by pregnant women as a source of calcium.  Recently, the poorest Haitians have made this remedy a staple in their diet. 

With the dramatic increase in the price of oil, food prices around the world have equally risen.  The heightened price of food severally affects Caribbean countries, such as Haiti, because so much of their food supply is dependant on imports.  Food prices in some areas of the Caribbean have increased by forty percent. 

Nearly eighty percent of the Haitian population lives on less than two dollars a day.  In the poor slums of Haiti, two cups of rice sell for sixty cents, while dirt, enough to make one hundred cookies, sells for five dollars. 

For more information, please see:

AP – Poor Haitians Resort to Eating Dirt – 30 January 2008

United States and Others Support ‘Sham Democracies’

By Jacob Leon Beier
Impunity Watch Senior Desk Officer, North America

WASHINGTON, United States - [AP] The Human Rights Watch World Report 2008 concludes “established democracies are accepting flawed and unfair elections for political expediency.  By allowing autocrats to pose as democrats, without demanding they uphold the civil and political rights that make democracy meaningful, the United States, the European Union and other influential democracies risk undermining human rights.”

The 2008 World Report, the 18th compiled by Human Rights Watch, examined 75 countries and their respective governments.  Human Rights Watch “identified many human rights challenges in need of attention, including atrocities in Chad, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia’s Ogaden region, Iraq, Somalia, Sri Lanka, and Sudan’s Darfur region, as well as closed societies or severe repression in Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Libya, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam.”

Kenneth Roth, executive direction of Human Rights Watch argued, “It’s now to easy for autocrats to get away with mounting a sham democracy.  That’s because too many Western government insist on elections and leave it at that.  They don’t pressure governments on the key human rights issues that make democracy function.”

The report also identified countries that have committed human rights violations during the war on terror, including France, Pakistan, the UK, and the US.

Germany, France and other leaders in the European Union were admonished for their continued reluctance to admit Turkey into the union.  Turkey’s human rights record has steadily improved according to Human Rights Watch.

The report implicated countries such as Kenya and Pakistan—nations that have experienced recent governmental deterioration—for not emphasizing the rights of their citizens.  Additionally, the report found that some countries, including Thailand, Jordan, Bahrain, Nigeria, and Russia, act as if holding a vote is the only requirement of democratic governance.  All too often, the established democracies of the West support this misguided assertion of legitimacy.

Human Rights Watch asserts that true democratic government respect the human rights of their citizens, including the rights to a free press, assembly, and a functional civil society capable of checking governmental authority.

For more information, please see:

Associated Press – Report Says Democracies Enable Despots – 31 January 2008

Human Rights Watch – World Report 2008

BBC – West ‘Embraces Sham Democracies’ – 31 January 2008

FT.com – West Accused of ‘Playing Along’ with Autocrats – 1 February 2008

 

Canadian Prime Minister Receives Letters to Intervene in Khadr Case

By:  Lindsey Brady
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

OTTAWA, Canada - Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has received letters from the United Church and multiple international human rights organizations over the weekend.  The United Church's letter reminded Harper that Khadr was fifteen at the time of his capture and should be treated in accord with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child.  Under the second part of Article 2 of the Convention, which Canada signed on to, "States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members."

Nora Sanders, General Secretary of the General Council wrote the letter for the United Church and said that Canada should uphold their image of being strong advocates for human rights and take a more active role in the Khadr case.  Khadr, who was Canadian born, is going in front of a military commission in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba where he has been held in order to decide whether the United States can prosecute Khadr for war crimes.  Human Rights Watch states that if the commission finds that the prosecution can continue, Khadr would be the first child charged with committing alleged war crimes in western nations.  Khadr's lawyers are expected to argue for his release because he was a minor under international law.

The second letter sent to the Prime Minister was from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, and Human Rights First.  Their letter, like the one sent by United Church, asks Prime Minister Harper to either allow Khadr to be tried according to international rules for juveniles or that he be sent back to Canada.  The Canadian Press says Harper has stated Canada would not intervene in Khadr's trial.  Human Rights Watch accuses, "throughout Khadr's lengthy detention the United States has flouted international juvenile justice standards that provide for children to be treated consistent with their unique vulnerability, capacity for rehabilitation, and lower degree of culpability."

For more information, please see:

The Canadian Press - International Rights Groups Ask Harper to Intervene in Omar Khadr case - 2 February 2008

CNW Telebec - United Church Appeals to Prime Minister on Behalf of Omar Khadr - 31 January 2008

Human Rights Watch - Letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Omar Khadr - 1 February 2008

BRIEF: Congress Approves 15-Day Extension of Surveillance Law

WASHINGTON, United States – Following congressional approval, President Bush signed a temporary extension of surveillance law that permits the warrantless wiretapping of telephone conversations that involve an overseas participant.

The 15-day extension of the “Protect America Act”—set to expire on February 1—provides the government with vast powers to conduct surveillance without judicial supervision.  A major discussion in the current debate on warrantless wiretapping is the status of telecommunication companies.  Congressional Democrats have refused to grant immunity to companies that have provided the government with information to use in surveillance.

Critics have charged that the surveillance laws unconstitutionally invade the privacy of American citizens.

For more information, please see:

The Washington Post – Surveillance Law Extended For 15 Days – 1 February 2008

The White House – Fact Sheet: The Protect America Act of 2007 – 6 August 2007

Canada Secretly Halts Prisoner Transfers to Afghanistan and Looks into new Guidelines for Handling Detainees

By:  Lindsey Brady
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

OTTAWA, Canada - Canada's Liberal government signed an agreement in 2005 with the Afghanistan government which outlined how detainees would be transferred.  In May of 2007 the current Conservative government signed a second that allowed officials to report on the conditions of detainees sent to Afghanistan.  The Star reported that it was this agreement to visit the Afghan prisons that led to the "credible allegation of abuse."

CBC News reported last week that a report, recently made public, contained the testimony of one detainee being held in an Afghanistan prison.  A Canadian diplomat interviewing the detainee said the he showed "fresh welts" on his body and showed the diplomat a electrical cable and rubber hose he said were responsible for the marks.  The Star states it was this revelation that led to the temporary hold on the transfer of detainees.

Peter MacKay, Canadian Defense Minister, stated "Canada's policy on transferring prisoners to Afghan authorities hasn't changed, even though it was suspended two months ago."  The public is just now discovering the halt on transfers but other officials, such as Liberal Leader Stephane Dion was quoted by the Canwest News Service as revealing he was told along with deputy leader Michael Ignatieff about the suspension but were told told to keep the information a secret for security reasons.

In addition to the recent news that transfers have been suspended it was revealed today that Canada has been secretly working with other countries on a new global policy outlining the way detainees are handled.  According to The Star, many countries, including Denmark (who has heading the initiative), U.S., Pakistan, Britain, and various other nations from Europe and Africa.  The Danish government hopes to develop rules with these countries that will be under the authority of the United Nations.  Thomas Winkler, head of Danish foreign ministry's department of international law stated, "the way detainees are handled may depend, to some extent on who is detaining them...it creates some uncertainty between forces participating in the same operation, and it may affect the efficiency of the joint operations."  The group will meet again in April and include the advice of military officials who will provide their first hand experience of soldiers who are taking in and eventually transferring the detainees.

Tories from Canada, claim that it is the intention of the Conservative government to continue the transfers once the risk of abuse in the Afghan prisons lessens.  All of this comes in the midst of a suit against the Canadian government brought on by Amnesty International Canada and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.  The two human rights groups, according to CBC News, are claiming that "the Charter of Rights and Freedoms bars Canadian Forces operating abroad from transferring prisoners of war to custody in which they could be tortured."

For more information, please see:

The Star - Canada Joins Bid to Create Global Policy on Detainees - 31 January 2008

CBC News - Canada Ended Handover of Afghan Detainees Months Ago - 23 January 2008

The Ottawa Citizen - MacKay Defends Detainee Policy - 27 January 2008

Canwest News Service - Dion says he Knew of Detainees Policy, but Sworn to Secrecy - 26 January 2008