U.N. human rights investigators are launching a year-long global investigation into secret places of detention. They note the use of such facilities has increased since the global war on terror was declared after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States. The investigators say their probe will look at so-called rendition flights used by the Central Intelligence Agency, or CIA, in the United States to secretly transfer suspects to third countries for interrogation. The UN probe also will examine the policies of secret detention as practiced by other nations around the world.
Cracks are appearing in the wall of silence surrounding the secret practice of extraordinary rendition as prisoners are coming forward to tell of their ordeals.
"The torture was going on sometimes weekly, sometimes monthly," said a former prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, Binyam Mohamed, who accuses the British security service MI5 of helping U.S. intelligence agents interrogate him after he was seized in Pakistan in 2002. Mohamed claims U.S. agents took him to Morocco, where he was tortured.
"I want to see people taking responsibility for what has happened over the seven years," said Mohamed. "If we let people just do what they want to do and not be held accountable, that is opening up the doors to torture and abuse."
The U.N. investigators who are launching a probe into secret places of detention agree with Mohamed. They contend people who are detained in these facilities are intentionally placed outside the protection of the law.
They say people who are confined in such places run great risks of being tortured and even disappearing for good.
UN Special Investigator on Torture, Manfred Nowak, says secret places of detention, enforced disappearances and torture are closely interconnected. He adds the risk of being subjected to torture is particularly high in these facilities.
"We have had the experiences in many Latin American states, but also in many other states where enforced disappearances were practiced," said Nowak. "Also, in the form of fighting terrorism. There is nothing new that now after 9/11, in the global fight against terrorism, that secret places of detention again came to the forefront of our attention, of course, in the context of CIA practices, but going far beyond that."
The U.N. probe will look at CIA rendition flights that secretly transferred terror suspects for interrogation, mainly in North Africa and the Middle East. Nowak is very critical of the widespread use of this practice by the former Bush administration.
"The very purpose of so-called extraordinary renditions employed by the Bush administration was that in cases where the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the CIA in places like Guantanemo Bay, etc. were not 'successful' ... enough, that they were then sent to countries known for their torture practices by means of extraordinary rendition flights," said Nowak.
U.N. human rights investigators applaud moves made by President Barack Obama in pledging to close Guantanamo Bay and stopping the practice of torture and extraordinary rendition. But, they say they will not let the president off the hook until a number of important questions are answered and certain reprehensible acts are ended.
UN Special Investigator on terrorism, Martin Scheinin, says he will be watching the president's moves closely.
"We can at least hope that this is a real change, which will put an end to the most horrendous forms of extraordinary rendition," said Scheinin, "where persons were not brought to the United States at all, but were dumped in third countries for the purpose of torture."
Member of Parliament in Pakistan, Sanaullah Baloch, praises the investigation that is getting under way. But, he tells the U.N. experts to expand their focus to include countries like his own in their probe.
"In Pakistan, the Asian Human Rights Commission of Pakistan has identified 52 illegal detention centers in Pakistan," said Baloch. "So my suggestion is that there should be a type of mechanism that United Nations aid, United Nations cooperation and United Nations support to the democratic regimes must be linked, should be linked with this protection of human rights and particularly getting rid of this practice of enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and secret detention centers. "
The U.N. investigators agree that torture in secret places of detention might be useful in eliciting information. But, they argue that more often than not, the information received is wrong and might end up being counterproductive.
Regardless of the quality of information received, they note torture, under any circumstances, is absolutely prohibited under international law.
The experts expect their one-year global probe into secret detention centers to shine more light on the extensiveness of these facilities and how they operate.
They acknowledge they will not be able to prevent similar practices in the future, but they are hopeful their study will promote changes for the better.

 Within his first week of taking office, President Obama took steps that signaled a break with the counterterrorism policies of the Bush administration, vowing to fight terrorism “in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals.” The new president signed executive orders pledging to shut Guantánamo within a year, undertake a thorough review of the Guantánamo military commissions, and prohibit harsh interrogation tactics. Despite these important steps, a Council on Foreign Relations Working Paper says critical issues remain unresolved.
Written by Daniel B. Prieto, an adjunct senior fellow for counterterrorism and national security at the Council on Foreign Relations, the paper examines the deep partisan and ideological disagreements surrounding U.S. counterterrorism policy and civil liberties and charts a course forward, arguing that “it is critical that the United States achieve a new bipartisan national consensus on how to confront and defeat the threat posed by al-Qaeda and associated groups, yet stay true to U.S. values.”
The paper, War About Terror: Civil Liberties and National Security After 9/11, finds that “counterterrorism policies are sustainable over the long term only if policymakers design them with the coequal objectives of improving national security and protecting civil liberties. Any policy or program that consistently prioritizes one objective over the other will not be durable over the long term, and will eventually fail the country on both counts.”
Prieto applauds the new direction signaled by Obama, noting that “counterterrorism policies and programs that deviate from a commitment to protecting individual liberties harm U.S. foreign policy and national security.” The paper finds that international skepticism of the United States’ moral credibility and commitment to the rule of law has hampered cooperation on counterterrorism initiatives with other nations and aided terrorist radicalization and recruitment.
The paper makes recommendations on some of the following aspects of U.S. counterterrorism policy:
Interrogation:
On interrogation, “the United States should reaffirm emphatically and unequivocally its commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions regarding detainee treatment and interrogation and to not engage in cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, or torture.”
Although Obama’s new order mandates that the CIA adhere to interrogation guidelines used by the military, a separate protocol may still be established to govern intelligence agency interrogation practices.

o “Requiring the CIA to adhere to the Army Field Manual is one way to resolve the controversy surrounding allowable CIA interrogation techniques. Another option... is for Congress to explicitly require the CIA to abide by interrogation procedures established by the president and the CIA director, within the parameters of humane treatment as required by law.” “Having Congress explicitly bind the CIA’s adherence…would give [these techniques] additional force in law and strengthen oversight.”

There should be a well-defined role for Congress whenever changes are made to CIA techniques.

o “The president should be required to inform and engage congressional leadership when altering CIA techniques” on a case-by-case basis to address emergency situations. “Establishing a known mechanism that makes consultation and disclosure a priority will go far to ensure that the potential use of certain coercive measures is rare and limited to truly emergency situations… and mutually agreed to by the nation’s most senior leaders.” “This would ensure accountability at the most senior levels of government and that front-line operatives were not put at undue risk of potential prosecution when they implemented approved policies and procedures.”

Detention and Trials:
The paper supports the closure of Guantánamo and the CIA “black site” prisons abroad, but notes that their closure will not resolve the larger policy issues that persist in the U.S. detention regime. Even after the closure of Guantánamo, the U.S. regime for detaining and trying al-Qaeda operatives will remain “a work in progress, in which critical issues remain unresolved.”
Congress and the president should revisit the extent and basis for executive branch action against al-Qaeda globally. The president should work with Congress to update and clarify the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to better calibrate counterterrorism authorities with the current threat environment.
Obama’s order suspends the military commissions used to try prisoners in Guantánamo, but the commissions might be preserved in some form for certain dangerous detainees.

o Going forward, Congress could decide to “revise the AUMF to narrow the ability of the executive branch to deal with suspected-terrorist detainees under the laws of war, and thereby in military commissions.”

o Detainees who are either U.S. persons or captured within the United States should be subject to U.S. criminal law and tried in federal courts.

o For foreign detainees, if the United States abandons military commissions altogether, future detainees could be “tried in their home countries or in countries of their capture,” U.S. courts martial, U.S. federal criminal courts, or—if the Congress and the president decided to create them—new national security courts.

The paper calls for an end to indefinite detention and says that “detainees should not face the prospect of erroneous or indefinite detention without a meaningful ability to challenge the basis for their detention or face trial.”

Domestic Intelligence:
The paper also finds that domestic intelligence efforts undertaken by the United States since 9/11—including the National Security Agency’s electronic surveillance, the Department of Defense’s force protection initiatives, national security letters, terrorist finance tracking, data mining, and watchlists—have been ad hoc and that oversight has been weak.

o “The United States lacks a coordinated and coherent approach to domestic intelligence,” says the paper. “The United States should develop a national strategy for domestic intelligence,” and President Obama should “designate the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) as the lead organization for coordinating domestic intelligence.”
o Congress should “establish a new Privacy Act to provide consistent principles and clear guidance for the government’s use of personal data provided by third parties and of computer-aided data analysis to assess the homeland security and terrorism risk posed by U.S. persons.”
o The United States should establish clear limits on the Department of Defense’s (DOD) intelligence activities within U.S. territory. “As part of the development of a national strategy for domestic intelligence, Congress and the DNI should set clear limits on what types of DOD homeland defense intelligence activities are and are not allowable within the United States.”

Author: Daniel B. Prieto, Adjunct Senior Fellow for Counterterrorism and National Security

Council on Foreign Relations

Full text of the Working Paper

Nat Hentoff, one of the foremost authorities on the First Amendment, has joined the Cato Institute as a senior fellow.
"The core of libertarianism is a defense of free speech," said Ed Crane, President and CEO of the Cato Institute. "No American in recent history has done more in defense of free speech and the First Amendment than the great civil libertarian, Nat Hentoff. All of us at Cato are honored to have him as a colleague."
Hentoff left the Village Voice in December, where he had been a columnist for 50 years. Hentoff's column, Sweet Land of Liberty, has been distributed by the United Feature Syndicate since 1992.
"Becoming a senior fellow of the Cato Institute – from whose publications I've often quoted – enables me to continue following the advice of my earliest mentor, Duke Ellington, who told me never to be caught up in a musical or any other categories," said Hentoff. "Duke said that it's always the individual's expression that defines his identity. All these years later, if I had to describe myself, it would be as an uncategorizable libertarian – and that's why I'm delighted to be at the Cato Institute, where freedom rings."
Hentoff is a widely acknowledged defender of civil liberties. While his books and articles regularly defend the rights of Americans to think and speak freely, he also explores freedoms under the rest of the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment by showing how Supreme Court and local legislative decisions affect the lives of ordinary Americans.
Hentoff has earned numerous awards over the course of his career. In 1980, he was awarded an American Bar Association Silver Gavel Award for his coverage of the law and criminal justice in his columns. In 1983, the American Library Association awarded him the Imroth Award for Intellectual Freedom. In 1995, he received the National Press Foundation Award for Distinguished Contributions to Journalism, and in 1999, he was a Pulitzer finalist for commentary. Hentoff has authored many books, including Living the Bill of Rights: How to be an Authentic American and Free Speech For Me But Not For Thee.
A jazz expert, Hentoff also writes on music for The Wall Street Journal and Jazz Times. He serves on the Board of Advisors of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (F.I.R.E.) and is on the steering committee of the Reporters' Committee for the Freedom of the Press.
Cato Media Relations at 202-789-5200 or e-mail pr@cato.org.

USATODAY.com

A U.S. judge has accused the Bush administration of hiding evidence in the case of a Yemen man who has been held as a terror suspect at Guantanamo Bay for six years.

Reason Magazine

- No Child Left Behind: "Two weeks before the Texas Supreme Court unanimously rejected the wholesale removal of children from the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, a spokesman for the state’s Child Protective Services (CPS) insisted the case “is not about religion.”"