FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A Failure of Democracy and Human Rights

It is a sad day for democracy when 12 Nobel Peace Laureates write a letter to President Barak Obama urging him to close one of the darkest chapters of recent U.S. history by acknowledging, and then rejecting, the “flagrant use of torture and other violations of international law” that had been conducted with the excuse of “fighting for terrorism” since 2001. That the recipient of the letter is a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate himself makes the situation ludicrous. That he presides over the country purported to be one of the world’s leading democracies makes the situation even more incongruous.

For those of us who used to admire President Obama for his avowed stand on human rights, his reelection seemed to give him the opportunity to fulfill the promises he made regarding the closure of Guantanamo, the use of torture and the killing of innocent people in several countries in conflict.

However, we are still to see a determined action from him on the human rights front, to which he only paid so far lip service. And it makes us wonder who really holds power in the U.S.? How is it possible that the president of the most powerful country in the world is unable to rally the support necessary to end one of the most disgraceful policies of the U.S. government?

Although six months have passed since the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence voted to release its 480-page executive summary of its review of the nation’s “enhanced interrogation” program, the release of the unabridged and uncensored summary has not yet happened.

The reasons for this situation are not a secret. As the Committee’s leader, California’s Senator Dianne Feinstein stated last April, “The report exposes brutality that stands in stark contrast to our values as a nation. It chronicles a stain in our history that must never again be allowed to happen.”

In a two-year study, the Constitution Project, a U.S. independent group, concluded that it was indisputable that U.S. forces had employed torture as well as “cruel, inhuman or degrading” treatment in many interrogations; that “the nation’s most senior officials” bear ultimate responsibility for allowing and contributing to the spread of these techniques; and that there is substantial evidence that information obtained by these methods was neither useful nor reliable.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held since the 1890s that punishments that involve torture are prohibited under the Eighth Amendment that states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The U.S. is a party to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which originated in the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1984, and that was signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1988 and ratified by the Senate on October 27, 1990.

In addition, the U.S. is a party to the following conventions that prohibit torture: the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights signed in 1977 and ratified in 1992.

In 2006 the military issued field manuals on intelligence collection and counterinsurgency that stressed that “no person in the custody or under the control of the Department of Defense, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject
to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in accordance with and as defined in U.S. law.

However, despite these guidelines, the U.S. military systematically violated these rules both at Guantánamo, in Abu Ghraib and in more than 17 countries where both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals were transferred to U.S. administered detention facilities, where they were held incommunicado for periods of months and even years. That happened in spite of the fact that the Convention Against Torture proscribes signatory states from transferring a detainee to other countries “where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.”

Those actions, taken in full knowledge of the President of the United States led the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates to say, “We have reason to feel strongly about torture. Many of us among the Nobel Peace Prize laureates have seen firsthand the effects of the use of torture in our own countries. Some are torture survivors ourselves. Many have also been involved in the process of recovery, of helping to walk our countries and our regions out of the shadows of their own periods of conflict and abuse.”

“It is with this experience that we stand firmly with those Americans who are asking the US to bring its use of torture into the light of day, and for the United States to take the necessary steps to emerge from its dark period of its history, never to return.”

Dr. Cesar Chelala is a winner of an Overseas Press Club of America award. 

More articles by:

Dr. Cesar Chelala is a co-winner of the 1979 Overseas Press Club of America award for the article “Missing or Disappeared in Argentina: The Desperate Search for Thousands of Abducted Victims.”

September 26, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Time to Wake Up: the Neoliberal Order is Dying 
David J. Detmer
History Distorted: Sam Wineberg’s Critique of Howard Zinn
Robert Hunziker
An Unforeseen Climate Beast Awakens!
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Many More Women Are There?
Jörg Wiegratz
The Age of Fraud: the Link Between Capitalism and Profiteering by Deception
John Kendall Hawkins
Now There’s a Wall Between Us, Something There’s Been Lost…
William Kaufman
Brett Kavanaugh’s Wayward Penis: A New Twist
Michael Welton
A Wake-Up Call to the Canadian Left
Patrick Irelan
Brett Goes to School 
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
All Wars Are Illegal, Let’s Act!
Dean Baker
Robots, China and the Failure of Economics Reporters
Matthew Johnson
Cancel Kavanaugh
Rohullah Naderi – Rustam Ali Seerat
The Option of Self-Defense for Hazaras
September 25, 2018
Kenneth Surin
Fact-Finding Labour’s “Anti-Semitism” Crisis
Charles Pierson
Destroying Yemen as Humanely as Possible
James Rothenberg
Why Not Socialism?
Patrick Cockburn
How Putin Came Out on Top in Syria
John Grant
“Awesome Uncontrollable Male Passion” Meets Its Match
Guy Horton
Burma: Complicity With Evil?
Steve Stallone
Jujitsu Comms
William Blum
Bombing Libya: the Origins of Europe’s Immigration Crisis
John Feffer
There’s a New Crash Coming
Martha Pskowski
“The Emergency Isn’t Over”: the Homeless Commemorate a Year Since the Mexico City Earthquake
Fred Baumgarten
Ten Ways of Looking at Civility
Dean Baker
The Great Financial Crisis: Bernanke and the Bubble
Binoy Kampmark
Parasitic and Irrelevant: The University Vice Chancellor
September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail