globeandmail.com: Government can't be trusted on Afghanistan, lawyer
Thu Jan 24, 2008 7:06 pm (PST)
US reader comment first: More on the story from yesterday... . lovely isn't it? Canada won't turn prisoners over to us because WE ARE TORTURERS! We need to indict
the monsters in this administration.
http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wdetaineereax012 4/BNStory/ Afghanistan/ home
Government can't be trusted on Afghanistan, lawyers argue
ALEXANDER PANETTA
Canadian Press
January 24, 2008 at 4:23 PM EST
OTTAWA --- Human-rights lawyers pushing for a stop to prisoner transfers
argued in court Thursday that Canada's government cannot be trusted to
tell the truth about what goes on in Afghanistan.
Lawyer Paul Champ told a Federal Court hearing that the government would
clearly have covered up prisoner abuses by Afghan authorities had it not
been for the ongoing legal battle.
In a secret policy shift almost three months ago, Canadian soldiers
stopped transferring detainees to Afghan authorities after they were
convinced some had been beaten in violation of the Geneva conventions.
"The government shouldn't be making those decisions," Mr. Champ said
during a break in proceedings.
Members of Parachute Company, Third Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment
Battalion Group lead detainees from a residential compound in southwest
Kabul in this 2004 file photo.
<http://images. theglobeandmail. com/archives/ RTGAM/images/ 20080124/ wdetaineereax012 4/detainee_ 500big.jpg>
Enlarge Image
<http://images. theglobeandmail. com/archives/ RTGAM/images/ 20080124/ wdetaineereax012 4/detainee_ 500big.jpg>
Members of Parachute Company, Third Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment
Battalion Group lead detainees from a residential compound in southwest
Kabul in this 2004 file photo. (MCpl Brian Walsh)
Videos
John Manley
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/Page/ document/ video/vs? id=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123& ids=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123>
Manley on the Afghanistan mission
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/Page/ document/ video/vs? id=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123& ids=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123>
Audio: Excerpts from Manley's discussion with the Globe's editorial
board (30 minutes)
Related Articles
Recent
* Tories assailed for secretive Afghan communications strategy
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wafgancommunicat ions0124/ BNStory/Afghanis tan>
* Canada quietly halts prisoner transfers
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wafghandetainees 24/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
* Detainee torture remains a reality, reports show
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080122. wafghandetainee2 2/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
* Combat role won't exceed 10 years, Manley says
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wmanley24/ BNStory/Afghanis tan>
* PM's gag order erodes support, Manley says
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wmanleycommunica tions24/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
Internet Links
* *Radwanski: *The absence of Plan B
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080122. WBwbradwanski200 80122132303/ WBStory/WBwbradw anski/>
* *Full coverage:* Canada's mission in Afghanistan
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ afghanistan>
* *On the Web:* Read the panel's final report
<http://www.collecti onscanada. gc.ca/obj/ 013003/f2/ 013003-1000- e.pdf> Popup
The Globe and Mail
"It should be the court because (the government has) shown in the past
they're wrong and the consequence of their errors has been that torture
had been committed."
The move came after the government spent nearly a year dismissing abuse
allegations and ridiculing opponents who raised them.
The policy shift only came to light after Mr. Champ fought in court for
access to government documents, which he finally received along with a
letter from a federal lawyer announcing the change.
Mr. Champ fears that many of the captives taken by Canadian troops are
not even Taliban combatants but civilians sympathetic to the insurgency.
Previously secret documents suggest some have disappeared in custody and
he fears they could have been killed.
He wants transfers suspended indefinitely and is seeking a Federal Court
injunction to that effect.
"Transfers could resume next week --- or tomorrow --- and no one would
know," said Mr. Champ, a lawyer for Amnesty International and the B.C.
Civil Liberties Association.
"This is not a moot issue."
He is pushing to have the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply
to interactions between Canadian soldiers and their prisoners --- even
in foreign countries.
Mr. Champ said other countries have adopted similar models and that
Canada should follow suit.
A federal lawyer argued that Mr. Champ's quest for an injunction is now
moot because the transfers have stopped. But he was cut off by the judge
when he suggested the controversy was over.
"Up until noon on Tuesday we thought there was a live controversy, " said
Federal Court Justice Anne Mactavish.
She added that the prisoner policy could change at a moment's notice and
nobody would ever know.
But the federal lawyer said Afghan detainees are and will remain safe
from torture.
"The facts that are before this court offer no indication that anyone's
rights are being threatened," said federal attorney J. Sanderson Graham.
"What will happen in two weeks, or two months, is mere speculation. "
An army general told the court that Canadian troops stopped transferring
enemy prisoners to Afghan authorities the day after a Nov. 5 prison
visit found evidence of torture.
Brigadier-General André Deschamps, chief of staff to Canada's
Expeditionary Forces Command and the first witness to testify at the
injunction hearing, said the decision was made by Col. Christian Juneau.
Col. Juneau was acting commander of Canada's military effort in
Afghanistan when Canadian officials heard stories of abuse from
prisoners at a Kandahar prison.
The decision came after the Conservative government ridiculed its
opponents for raising torture allegations and Prime Minister Stephen
Harper accused them of being pro-Taliban.
Brig.-Gen. Deschamps said no prisoners have been transferred since that
prison visit.
But human-rights lawyers were continually thwarted in their efforts to
learn more as the defence sprang up and claimed National Defence Act
protections following a number of Champ's questions.
Mr. Graham rose and repeated, "I object," when Mr. Champ asked why the
government never told Canadians about the policy change, where the
detainees are now, and how many there are.
Brig.-Gen. Deschamps did say the prisoner facility at Kandahar airfield
has not been expanded since the decision.
During their Nov. 5 visit, Canadian officials saw what they described as
credible evidence of torture.
They had documented a number of other allegations --- at one point
seeing scars on a man who said he received electric shocks --- but they
only shifted their policy after that visit.
On that day, a prisoner told the Canadians he'd been beaten unconscious,
whipped with electrical cables, and belted with a rubber hose. He showed
them his bruises and told them exactly where they could find the torture
instruments.
He then led them to his prison cell, where they found the hose and
cables under a chair.
The human-rights lawyers expressed doubt that the decision to halt
transfers was made by a colonel in Kandahar.
They said it must have been made in Ottawa, and that the Prime
Minister's Office would likely have been aware of such a major policy shift.
The government kept its decision under wraps, even as it prepared to
fight rights groups seeking a halt to transfers in court Thursday.
"Canadian authorities were informed on November 5, 2007, by Canada's
monitoring team, of a credible allegation of mistreatment pertaining to
one Canadian-transferre d detainee held in an Afghan detention facility,"
the lawyers said in a letter to Amnesty International Canada and the
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.
"As a consequence there have been no transfers of detainees to Afghan
authorities since that date," the letter confirmed.
"It's staggering," Jason Gratl, president of the BCCLA said of the
government's belated admission. "In matters as important as complicity
in torture and its conduct of war, the government owes Canadians some
explanations in an open and frank manner."
The government, which is trying to drum up support for extending the
Afghan mission, only revealed it had ceased transfers as it tried to
make a deal with Amnesty and the BCCLA to drop their application for an
injunction.
But Ottawa refused a counteroffer in which it would have agreed to give
seven days notice before resuming transfers.
It's not clear whether troops are still taking prisoners only to release
them, holding them in temporary cells run by Canadian Military Police on
Kandahar Air Base or once again turning prisoners over to U.S. forces,
which operate a prison at Bagram in Afghanistan.
"Concerning the matter of detainees, the number of detainees, if they
are being transferred or not, these are all operational matters and are
the responsibility of the Canadian Forces. The Government will not
provide any comment on operational matters," said Sandra Buckler,
spokeswoman for Mr. Harper.
The letter to Amnesty and the BCCLA continued: "Canada will resume
transferring detainees when it believes it can do so in accordance with
its international legal obligations. "
Among those obligations is a Geneva Conventions prohibition against
handing prisoners over to those who would abuse or torture them.
Given the widely documented and widespread abuse and ill-treatment that
is rife in Afghan prisons, Mr. Gratl said he "could not foresee detainee
transfers resuming in the foreseeable future.
"The government's decision amounts to a concession that the May, 2007,
monitoring agreement has failed to prevent torture by Afghan
authorities, " he said.
That agreement, which allows for follow-up inspections, was negotiated
only after former defence minister Gordon O'Connor's assurances that the
International Committee of the Red Cross would report abuse of
transferred prisoners back to the Harper government were shown to be wrong.
More than a month after it stopped handing prisoners over to
Afghanistan' s National Directorate of Security, the Harper government
sent a senior general to give a sworn affidavit in the case brought by
Amnesty and BCCLA.
The rights groups wanted transfers banned, claiming the government is
bound by both international law and the Canadian Constitution from
delivering detainees to those likely to torture or abuse them.
Building a NATO detention facility, perhaps on the Kandahar base, which
currently houses more than 10,000 troops, has been repeatedly suggested
by international human-rights groups. Canada and most NATO nations are
opposed.
*Detainee timeline*
*2001*
Dec. 19: Then-defence- minister Art Eggleton reveals that Canadian
forces, specifically commandos from Joint Task Force 2, have joined the
war, sparking concerns about whether troops would turn captured Afghans
over to U.S. authorities.
*2002*
Jan. 21: Canadian commandos turn three captured al-Qaeda fighters over
to the U.S. military.
Jan. 28: Then-prime-minister Jean Chrétien says the government is
reviewing its policy on prisoners and that opposition concerns are
"hypothetical" because none have been taken.
Jan. 29: Mr. Eggleton admits he learned eight days earlier that Canadian
commandos had turned over prisoners without any assurances about whether
they would be treated as prisoners of war.
Feb. 6: U.S. President George W. Bush says that Taliban prisoners would
be considered POWs under the Geneva Conventions, but al-Qaeda prisoners
would not.
Feb. 7: Both Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Eggleton say they are satisfied with
this guarantee.
*2005*
Dec. 18: General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, signs an
agreement with Afghanistan' s Defence Minister stipulating that detainees
handed from Canadian to Afghan custody will be treated in accordance
with the third Geneva convention, which forbids torture and other
inhumane treatment.
*2006*
May 31: Defence Minister Dennis O'Connor says the International
Committee of the Red Cross is monitoring detainees, and will report
prisoner abuse to Canada.
*2007*
February: Investigations are launched into the treatment of Afghan
detainees after The Globe and Mail publishes allegations of abuse.
Feb. 21: Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties
Association file an application in Federal Court seeking a judicial
review of the military's detainee-handover policy, questioning whether
Canadian soldiers abroad are legally bound by the Geneva Conventions.
March 21: Mr. O'Connor apologizes for providing inaccurate information.
"I would like to be clear: The International Committee of the Red Cross
is under no obligation to share information with Canada on the treatment
of detainees transferred by Canada to Afghan authorities, " he tells the
House of Commons. "The International Committee of the Red Cross provides
this information to the country that has the detainees in its custody,
in this case, Afghanistan. "
April 23: During 30 face-to-face interviews with The Globe and Mail,
Afghans detained by Canadian soldiers and sent to Kandahar's notorious
jails say they were beaten, whipped, starved, frozen, choked and
subjected to electric shocks during interrogation.
April 24: Stephen Harper brushes off calls for his Defence Minister's
head and dismisses the furor over the torture of Afghans captured by
Canadian soldiers as "allegations of the Taliban. ... We do not have
evidence that [the torture] is true."
April 26: The Harper government buckles and announces a new deal
providing Canadian officials with full access to Afghan jails.
July 9: It is learned that Gen. Hillier's office has halted the release
of documents relating to detainees captured in Afghanistan under the
federal Access to Information Act, claiming that disclosure of any such
information could endanger Canadian troops.
Sept. 22: Canada is unable to account for at least 50 prisoners it
captured and turned over to Afghan authorities, frustrating efforts to
put to rest concerns the detainees were subject to torture. Canadian
sources blame the Afghans' shoddy record-keeping and suggest the
detainees have likely returned safely to their homes. But officials
familiar with Kandahar's justice system say the possibility of foul play
cannot be dismissed.
Nov. 13: Turning Afghan detainees over to known torturers breaks
international law, and Canada, along with other NATO countries should
impose an immediate halt to transfers, Amnesty International says.
Nov. 15: Canadian officials confirm they have evidence a Taliban
detainee showed signs of physical abuse, the seventh such allegation
made by detainees since Canada began systematically visiting Afghan
prisoners in May.
*2008*
Jan. 22: Compelling evidence that Canadian-transferre d detainees are
still being tortured in Afghan prisons emerges from the government's own
follow-up inspection reports.
/With a report from Paul Koring/
--
Please visit and take action at: http://freedetainee s.wordpress. com/
the monsters in this administration.
http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wdetaineereax012 4/BNStory/ Afghanistan/ home
Government can't be trusted on Afghanistan, lawyers argue
ALEXANDER PANETTA
Canadian Press
January 24, 2008 at 4:23 PM EST
OTTAWA --- Human-rights lawyers pushing for a stop to prisoner transfers
argued in court Thursday that Canada's government cannot be trusted to
tell the truth about what goes on in Afghanistan.
Lawyer Paul Champ told a Federal Court hearing that the government would
clearly have covered up prisoner abuses by Afghan authorities had it not
been for the ongoing legal battle.
In a secret policy shift almost three months ago, Canadian soldiers
stopped transferring detainees to Afghan authorities after they were
convinced some had been beaten in violation of the Geneva conventions.
"The government shouldn't be making those decisions," Mr. Champ said
during a break in proceedings.
Members of Parachute Company, Third Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment
Battalion Group lead detainees from a residential compound in southwest
Kabul in this 2004 file photo.
<http://images. theglobeandmail. com/archives/ RTGAM/images/ 20080124/ wdetaineereax012 4/detainee_ 500big.jpg>
Enlarge Image
<http://images. theglobeandmail. com/archives/ RTGAM/images/ 20080124/ wdetaineereax012 4/detainee_ 500big.jpg>
Members of Parachute Company, Third Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment
Battalion Group lead detainees from a residential compound in southwest
Kabul in this 2004 file photo. (MCpl Brian Walsh)
Videos
John Manley
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/Page/ document/ video/vs? id=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123& ids=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123>
Manley on the Afghanistan mission
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/Page/ document/ video/vs? id=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123& ids=RTGAM. 20080123. wvmanley_ board0123>
Audio: Excerpts from Manley's discussion with the Globe's editorial
board (30 minutes)
Related Articles
Recent
* Tories assailed for secretive Afghan communications strategy
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wafgancommunicat ions0124/ BNStory/Afghanis tan>
* Canada quietly halts prisoner transfers
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wafghandetainees 24/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
* Detainee torture remains a reality, reports show
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080122. wafghandetainee2 2/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
* Combat role won't exceed 10 years, Manley says
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wmanley24/ BNStory/Afghanis tan>
* PM's gag order erodes support, Manley says
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080124. wmanleycommunica tions24/BNStory/ Afghanistan>
Internet Links
* *Radwanski: *The absence of Plan B
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ servlet/story/ RTGAM.20080122. WBwbradwanski200 80122132303/ WBStory/WBwbradw anski/>
* *Full coverage:* Canada's mission in Afghanistan
<http://www.theglobe andmail.com/ afghanistan>
* *On the Web:* Read the panel's final report
<http://www.collecti onscanada. gc.ca/obj/ 013003/f2/ 013003-1000- e.pdf> Popup
The Globe and Mail
"It should be the court because (the government has) shown in the past
they're wrong and the consequence of their errors has been that torture
had been committed."
The move came after the government spent nearly a year dismissing abuse
allegations and ridiculing opponents who raised them.
The policy shift only came to light after Mr. Champ fought in court for
access to government documents, which he finally received along with a
letter from a federal lawyer announcing the change.
Mr. Champ fears that many of the captives taken by Canadian troops are
not even Taliban combatants but civilians sympathetic to the insurgency.
Previously secret documents suggest some have disappeared in custody and
he fears they could have been killed.
He wants transfers suspended indefinitely and is seeking a Federal Court
injunction to that effect.
"Transfers could resume next week --- or tomorrow --- and no one would
know," said Mr. Champ, a lawyer for Amnesty International and the B.C.
Civil Liberties Association.
"This is not a moot issue."
He is pushing to have the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply
to interactions between Canadian soldiers and their prisoners --- even
in foreign countries.
Mr. Champ said other countries have adopted similar models and that
Canada should follow suit.
A federal lawyer argued that Mr. Champ's quest for an injunction is now
moot because the transfers have stopped. But he was cut off by the judge
when he suggested the controversy was over.
"Up until noon on Tuesday we thought there was a live controversy, " said
Federal Court Justice Anne Mactavish.
She added that the prisoner policy could change at a moment's notice and
nobody would ever know.
But the federal lawyer said Afghan detainees are and will remain safe
from torture.
"The facts that are before this court offer no indication that anyone's
rights are being threatened," said federal attorney J. Sanderson Graham.
"What will happen in two weeks, or two months, is mere speculation. "
An army general told the court that Canadian troops stopped transferring
enemy prisoners to Afghan authorities the day after a Nov. 5 prison
visit found evidence of torture.
Brigadier-General André Deschamps, chief of staff to Canada's
Expeditionary Forces Command and the first witness to testify at the
injunction hearing, said the decision was made by Col. Christian Juneau.
Col. Juneau was acting commander of Canada's military effort in
Afghanistan when Canadian officials heard stories of abuse from
prisoners at a Kandahar prison.
The decision came after the Conservative government ridiculed its
opponents for raising torture allegations and Prime Minister Stephen
Harper accused them of being pro-Taliban.
Brig.-Gen. Deschamps said no prisoners have been transferred since that
prison visit.
But human-rights lawyers were continually thwarted in their efforts to
learn more as the defence sprang up and claimed National Defence Act
protections following a number of Champ's questions.
Mr. Graham rose and repeated, "I object," when Mr. Champ asked why the
government never told Canadians about the policy change, where the
detainees are now, and how many there are.
Brig.-Gen. Deschamps did say the prisoner facility at Kandahar airfield
has not been expanded since the decision.
During their Nov. 5 visit, Canadian officials saw what they described as
credible evidence of torture.
They had documented a number of other allegations --- at one point
seeing scars on a man who said he received electric shocks --- but they
only shifted their policy after that visit.
On that day, a prisoner told the Canadians he'd been beaten unconscious,
whipped with electrical cables, and belted with a rubber hose. He showed
them his bruises and told them exactly where they could find the torture
instruments.
He then led them to his prison cell, where they found the hose and
cables under a chair.
The human-rights lawyers expressed doubt that the decision to halt
transfers was made by a colonel in Kandahar.
They said it must have been made in Ottawa, and that the Prime
Minister's Office would likely have been aware of such a major policy shift.
The government kept its decision under wraps, even as it prepared to
fight rights groups seeking a halt to transfers in court Thursday.
"Canadian authorities were informed on November 5, 2007, by Canada's
monitoring team, of a credible allegation of mistreatment pertaining to
one Canadian-transferre d detainee held in an Afghan detention facility,"
the lawyers said in a letter to Amnesty International Canada and the
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.
"As a consequence there have been no transfers of detainees to Afghan
authorities since that date," the letter confirmed.
"It's staggering," Jason Gratl, president of the BCCLA said of the
government's belated admission. "In matters as important as complicity
in torture and its conduct of war, the government owes Canadians some
explanations in an open and frank manner."
The government, which is trying to drum up support for extending the
Afghan mission, only revealed it had ceased transfers as it tried to
make a deal with Amnesty and the BCCLA to drop their application for an
injunction.
But Ottawa refused a counteroffer in which it would have agreed to give
seven days notice before resuming transfers.
It's not clear whether troops are still taking prisoners only to release
them, holding them in temporary cells run by Canadian Military Police on
Kandahar Air Base or once again turning prisoners over to U.S. forces,
which operate a prison at Bagram in Afghanistan.
"Concerning the matter of detainees, the number of detainees, if they
are being transferred or not, these are all operational matters and are
the responsibility of the Canadian Forces. The Government will not
provide any comment on operational matters," said Sandra Buckler,
spokeswoman for Mr. Harper.
The letter to Amnesty and the BCCLA continued: "Canada will resume
transferring detainees when it believes it can do so in accordance with
its international legal obligations. "
Among those obligations is a Geneva Conventions prohibition against
handing prisoners over to those who would abuse or torture them.
Given the widely documented and widespread abuse and ill-treatment that
is rife in Afghan prisons, Mr. Gratl said he "could not foresee detainee
transfers resuming in the foreseeable future.
"The government's decision amounts to a concession that the May, 2007,
monitoring agreement has failed to prevent torture by Afghan
authorities, " he said.
That agreement, which allows for follow-up inspections, was negotiated
only after former defence minister Gordon O'Connor's assurances that the
International Committee of the Red Cross would report abuse of
transferred prisoners back to the Harper government were shown to be wrong.
More than a month after it stopped handing prisoners over to
Afghanistan' s National Directorate of Security, the Harper government
sent a senior general to give a sworn affidavit in the case brought by
Amnesty and BCCLA.
The rights groups wanted transfers banned, claiming the government is
bound by both international law and the Canadian Constitution from
delivering detainees to those likely to torture or abuse them.
Building a NATO detention facility, perhaps on the Kandahar base, which
currently houses more than 10,000 troops, has been repeatedly suggested
by international human-rights groups. Canada and most NATO nations are
opposed.
*Detainee timeline*
*2001*
Dec. 19: Then-defence- minister Art Eggleton reveals that Canadian
forces, specifically commandos from Joint Task Force 2, have joined the
war, sparking concerns about whether troops would turn captured Afghans
over to U.S. authorities.
*2002*
Jan. 21: Canadian commandos turn three captured al-Qaeda fighters over
to the U.S. military.
Jan. 28: Then-prime-minister Jean Chrétien says the government is
reviewing its policy on prisoners and that opposition concerns are
"hypothetical" because none have been taken.
Jan. 29: Mr. Eggleton admits he learned eight days earlier that Canadian
commandos had turned over prisoners without any assurances about whether
they would be treated as prisoners of war.
Feb. 6: U.S. President George W. Bush says that Taliban prisoners would
be considered POWs under the Geneva Conventions, but al-Qaeda prisoners
would not.
Feb. 7: Both Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Eggleton say they are satisfied with
this guarantee.
*2005*
Dec. 18: General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, signs an
agreement with Afghanistan' s Defence Minister stipulating that detainees
handed from Canadian to Afghan custody will be treated in accordance
with the third Geneva convention, which forbids torture and other
inhumane treatment.
*2006*
May 31: Defence Minister Dennis O'Connor says the International
Committee of the Red Cross is monitoring detainees, and will report
prisoner abuse to Canada.
*2007*
February: Investigations are launched into the treatment of Afghan
detainees after The Globe and Mail publishes allegations of abuse.
Feb. 21: Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties
Association file an application in Federal Court seeking a judicial
review of the military's detainee-handover policy, questioning whether
Canadian soldiers abroad are legally bound by the Geneva Conventions.
March 21: Mr. O'Connor apologizes for providing inaccurate information.
"I would like to be clear: The International Committee of the Red Cross
is under no obligation to share information with Canada on the treatment
of detainees transferred by Canada to Afghan authorities, " he tells the
House of Commons. "The International Committee of the Red Cross provides
this information to the country that has the detainees in its custody,
in this case, Afghanistan. "
April 23: During 30 face-to-face interviews with The Globe and Mail,
Afghans detained by Canadian soldiers and sent to Kandahar's notorious
jails say they were beaten, whipped, starved, frozen, choked and
subjected to electric shocks during interrogation.
April 24: Stephen Harper brushes off calls for his Defence Minister's
head and dismisses the furor over the torture of Afghans captured by
Canadian soldiers as "allegations of the Taliban. ... We do not have
evidence that [the torture] is true."
April 26: The Harper government buckles and announces a new deal
providing Canadian officials with full access to Afghan jails.
July 9: It is learned that Gen. Hillier's office has halted the release
of documents relating to detainees captured in Afghanistan under the
federal Access to Information Act, claiming that disclosure of any such
information could endanger Canadian troops.
Sept. 22: Canada is unable to account for at least 50 prisoners it
captured and turned over to Afghan authorities, frustrating efforts to
put to rest concerns the detainees were subject to torture. Canadian
sources blame the Afghans' shoddy record-keeping and suggest the
detainees have likely returned safely to their homes. But officials
familiar with Kandahar's justice system say the possibility of foul play
cannot be dismissed.
Nov. 13: Turning Afghan detainees over to known torturers breaks
international law, and Canada, along with other NATO countries should
impose an immediate halt to transfers, Amnesty International says.
Nov. 15: Canadian officials confirm they have evidence a Taliban
detainee showed signs of physical abuse, the seventh such allegation
made by detainees since Canada began systematically visiting Afghan
prisoners in May.
*2008*
Jan. 22: Compelling evidence that Canadian-transferre d detainees are
still being tortured in Afghan prisons emerges from the government's own
follow-up inspection reports.
/With a report from Paul Koring/
--
Please visit and take action at: http://freedetainee s.wordpress. com/
Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:11 pm (PST)
http://www.alternet .org/rights/ 74464/?page= entireAlterNet
Canada's Child Soldier Problem
By Andy Worthington, AlterNet
Posted on January 24, 2008, Printed on January 24, 2008
http://www.alternet .org/story/ 74464/
How humiliating.
The story begins with the shameful case of Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian who was kidnapped by US agents as he changed planes in New York in 2002, and rendered to Syria, where he was tortured for a year on behalf of the American authorities before being released.
Mr. Arar--who was awarded millions of dollars in compensation by the Canadian government in January 2007, but has yet to receive even an apology from the US administration- -had been wrongly fingered by Canadian intelligence, and his case his one of many chilling examples of
the damage caused by failed intelligence in the American's program of "extraordinary rendition."
In an attempt to prime diplomats about how to spot the signs of torture when they visit Canadians in foreign jails, the Canadian government's Foreign Affairs Department instigated a "torture awareness workshop," which also informed the diplomats of where they could expect to find what CTV in Canada described as "countries and places with greater risks
of torture."
The list, in a training manual issued by the Foreign Affairs Department, included traditional offenders--Afghanis tan, China, Egypt, Iran, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Syria--but also included some torturers that are not generally mentioned in polite Western company: Israel and the United States. Specific mention was made of Guantánamo Bay, where, to drive the
point home, the manual noted specific "US interrogation techniques," including "forced nudity, isolation, and sleep deprivation. "
Oops.
The manual was never supposed to have been publicly released, of course, but the Canadian government inadvertently released it to lawyers for Amnesty International as evidence in a court case relating to the alleged abuse of Afghan detainees, after they were handed over by
Canadian soldiers to the local Afghan authorities. After realizing their mistake, government officials desperately tried to get the manual back, stating, as CTV put it bluntly, that they "wanted to black out sensitive parts that may anger allies."
It's too late for that, of course. While US ambassador David Wilkins declared, "We find it to be offensive for us to be on the same list with countries like Iran and China," adding, "Quite frankly it's absurd," lawyers and human rights activists have seized upon the documents to
insist, for the second time in only a few months, that the Canadian government is guilty of double standards in its refusal to act on behalf of Omar Khadr, a Canadian Guantánamo detainee who was just 15 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan in July 2002.
And they're right to do so. The first set of double standards was highlighted in September, when, during a visit to Canada to publicize Mr. Khadr's plight, his US military lawyer, Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, contrasted the Canadian government's "leadership in international efforts to recognize child soldiers as victims in need of special protection and rehabilitation" with its "virtual silence" in the case of his client. Just two weeks ago, David Crane, the former US prosecutor for Sierra Leone's war crimes trials, who is now a professor at Syracuse University, revived this argument, telling Michelle Shephard of the Toronto Star that he failed to understand how Canada and the United States "could be sympathetic to the plight of Africa's child soldiers, who are forced to commit atrocious crimes," but not to Khadr, whose circumstances were the same. "I'm just not sure why the Canadian government, which was tremendously important in my work in West Africa--they were incredibly supportive-- is not making a bigger deal of this," he said.
This latest revelation only adds to the government's self-inflicted woes. As Amir Attaran, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, explained to CTV, the new developments cast doubt on the government's assertion that Khadr is being treated fairly in US custody. "Canada has
just admitted we believe torture is possible in Guantánamo Bay," he told the broadcaster' s Canada AM show. "That clashes terribly with what Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said, that Mr. Khadr, who is in Guantánamo Bay and was a child at the time he was put there, is being given a (quote, unquote) appropriate judicial process. Torture is not an appropriate judicial process." Attaran went on to suggest that the Canadian government's refusal to demand Khadr's release from Guantánamo was purely political.
Lt. Cmdr. Kuebler also spoke to CTV, reinforcing Amir Attaran's statement that the documents relating to the "torture awareness workshop" contradict Prime Minister Stephen Harper's assurances that Khadr is receiving fair treatment. "Omar has been there for five and a
half years," he said, "and at some point in the course of [his] detention the Canadian government developed the suspicion he was being tortured and abused. And yet it has not acted to obtain his release from Guantánamo Bay and protect his rights, unlike every other Western country that has had its nationals detained in Guantánamo Bay."
Kuebler added that the suspicions that his client has been tortured at Guantánamo undermined any claims that he could receive a fair trial in his Military Commission-- the novel system of show trials invented by Dick Cheney and his advisors in November 2001, whose rampant lawlessness is discussed at length here.
He explained that he and the rest of his legal team want Khadr to be sent back to Canada to face justice there, and pointed out the absurdity of the Canadian government's claims that they were waiting for the US judicial process to play itself out. "Omar has certainly been abused, his rights have been violated under international law, and apparently the Canadian government has reason to believe that's true, and yet, they've acted not at all to assist him," he told CTV.
While the Canadian government attempts to repair its relations with the United States and Israel (which it has already begun to do, cravenly declaring that the list "wrongly" includes some of Canada's closest allies, and promising to revise it), the next phase of Omar Khadr's trial by Military Commission is scheduled to take place early next month, and several motions have already been filed on his behalf.
One argues that the Commissions are unconstitutional because they are designed only for non-Americans, and another--relating specifically to Mr. Khadr--argues that they have no jurisdiction over him because trying a detainee who was 15 years old at the time of his capture would violate the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, a United Nations measure ratified by the United States in 2002, which safeguards juveniles (those under 18 years old) from prosecution. As his lawyers have pointed out, "No international criminal tribunal established under the laws of war, from Nuremberg forward, has ever prosecuted former child soldiers as war criminals," adding that, if Commission judge Col. Peter Brownback pursues Khadr's case, he will be "the first in western history" to preside over a trial of alleged war crimes committed by a child.
Adding to the Canadian government's embarrassment, at almost the same time that the contents of the Canadian government's training manual were made public, it was revealed that 55 law professors and 22 members of Parliament, including Canada's former attorney general, Irwin Cotler, had signed the defense lawyers' motion, stating unequivocally, "It is a principle of customary international law that children are to be accorded special protections in all criminal proceedings, and in any prosecution for participation in warlike acts."
In the pipeline, undoubtedly, are numerous references to the Canadian government's latest gaffe, in documents to be filed by Omar Khadr's lawyers, which would be laughable if the result of the government's contradictions and cowardice were not so heartless.
You could ask Omar Khadr himself, if you could get anywhere near him.
Andy Worthington is a writer and historian, and author of The Guantánamo
Files.
© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet .org/story/ 74464/
Canada's Child Soldier Problem
By Andy Worthington, AlterNet
Posted on January 24, 2008, Printed on January 24, 2008
http://www.alternet .org/story/ 74464/
How humiliating.
The story begins with the shameful case of Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian who was kidnapped by US agents as he changed planes in New York in 2002, and rendered to Syria, where he was tortured for a year on behalf of the American authorities before being released.
Mr. Arar--who was awarded millions of dollars in compensation by the Canadian government in January 2007, but has yet to receive even an apology from the US administration- -had been wrongly fingered by Canadian intelligence, and his case his one of many chilling examples of
the damage caused by failed intelligence in the American's program of "extraordinary rendition."
In an attempt to prime diplomats about how to spot the signs of torture when they visit Canadians in foreign jails, the Canadian government's Foreign Affairs Department instigated a "torture awareness workshop," which also informed the diplomats of where they could expect to find what CTV in Canada described as "countries and places with greater risks
of torture."
The list, in a training manual issued by the Foreign Affairs Department, included traditional offenders--Afghanis tan, China, Egypt, Iran, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Syria--but also included some torturers that are not generally mentioned in polite Western company: Israel and the United States. Specific mention was made of Guantánamo Bay, where, to drive the
point home, the manual noted specific "US interrogation techniques," including "forced nudity, isolation, and sleep deprivation. "
Oops.
The manual was never supposed to have been publicly released, of course, but the Canadian government inadvertently released it to lawyers for Amnesty International as evidence in a court case relating to the alleged abuse of Afghan detainees, after they were handed over by
Canadian soldiers to the local Afghan authorities. After realizing their mistake, government officials desperately tried to get the manual back, stating, as CTV put it bluntly, that they "wanted to black out sensitive parts that may anger allies."
It's too late for that, of course. While US ambassador David Wilkins declared, "We find it to be offensive for us to be on the same list with countries like Iran and China," adding, "Quite frankly it's absurd," lawyers and human rights activists have seized upon the documents to
insist, for the second time in only a few months, that the Canadian government is guilty of double standards in its refusal to act on behalf of Omar Khadr, a Canadian Guantánamo detainee who was just 15 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan in July 2002.
And they're right to do so. The first set of double standards was highlighted in September, when, during a visit to Canada to publicize Mr. Khadr's plight, his US military lawyer, Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, contrasted the Canadian government's "leadership in international efforts to recognize child soldiers as victims in need of special protection and rehabilitation" with its "virtual silence" in the case of his client. Just two weeks ago, David Crane, the former US prosecutor for Sierra Leone's war crimes trials, who is now a professor at Syracuse University, revived this argument, telling Michelle Shephard of the Toronto Star that he failed to understand how Canada and the United States "could be sympathetic to the plight of Africa's child soldiers, who are forced to commit atrocious crimes," but not to Khadr, whose circumstances were the same. "I'm just not sure why the Canadian government, which was tremendously important in my work in West Africa--they were incredibly supportive-- is not making a bigger deal of this," he said.
This latest revelation only adds to the government's self-inflicted woes. As Amir Attaran, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, explained to CTV, the new developments cast doubt on the government's assertion that Khadr is being treated fairly in US custody. "Canada has
just admitted we believe torture is possible in Guantánamo Bay," he told the broadcaster' s Canada AM show. "That clashes terribly with what Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said, that Mr. Khadr, who is in Guantánamo Bay and was a child at the time he was put there, is being given a (quote, unquote) appropriate judicial process. Torture is not an appropriate judicial process." Attaran went on to suggest that the Canadian government's refusal to demand Khadr's release from Guantánamo was purely political.
"Out of a desire to appear tough on the war on terror, Mr. Harper has put this set of considerations out the window, and that's not appropriate, " he said, adding, "We have to obey the law."
Lt. Cmdr. Kuebler also spoke to CTV, reinforcing Amir Attaran's statement that the documents relating to the "torture awareness workshop" contradict Prime Minister Stephen Harper's assurances that Khadr is receiving fair treatment. "Omar has been there for five and a
half years," he said, "and at some point in the course of [his] detention the Canadian government developed the suspicion he was being tortured and abused. And yet it has not acted to obtain his release from Guantánamo Bay and protect his rights, unlike every other Western country that has had its nationals detained in Guantánamo Bay."
Kuebler added that the suspicions that his client has been tortured at Guantánamo undermined any claims that he could receive a fair trial in his Military Commission-- the novel system of show trials invented by Dick Cheney and his advisors in November 2001, whose rampant lawlessness is discussed at length here.
He explained that he and the rest of his legal team want Khadr to be sent back to Canada to face justice there, and pointed out the absurdity of the Canadian government's claims that they were waiting for the US judicial process to play itself out. "Omar has certainly been abused, his rights have been violated under international law, and apparently the Canadian government has reason to believe that's true, and yet, they've acted not at all to assist him," he told CTV.
While the Canadian government attempts to repair its relations with the United States and Israel (which it has already begun to do, cravenly declaring that the list "wrongly" includes some of Canada's closest allies, and promising to revise it), the next phase of Omar Khadr's trial by Military Commission is scheduled to take place early next month, and several motions have already been filed on his behalf.
One argues that the Commissions are unconstitutional because they are designed only for non-Americans, and another--relating specifically to Mr. Khadr--argues that they have no jurisdiction over him because trying a detainee who was 15 years old at the time of his capture would violate the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, a United Nations measure ratified by the United States in 2002, which safeguards juveniles (those under 18 years old) from prosecution. As his lawyers have pointed out, "No international criminal tribunal established under the laws of war, from Nuremberg forward, has ever prosecuted former child soldiers as war criminals," adding that, if Commission judge Col. Peter Brownback pursues Khadr's case, he will be "the first in western history" to preside over a trial of alleged war crimes committed by a child.
Adding to the Canadian government's embarrassment, at almost the same time that the contents of the Canadian government's training manual were made public, it was revealed that 55 law professors and 22 members of Parliament, including Canada's former attorney general, Irwin Cotler, had signed the defense lawyers' motion, stating unequivocally, "It is a principle of customary international law that children are to be accorded special protections in all criminal proceedings, and in any prosecution for participation in warlike acts."
In the pipeline, undoubtedly, are numerous references to the Canadian government's latest gaffe, in documents to be filed by Omar Khadr's lawyers, which would be laughable if the result of the government's contradictions and cowardice were not so heartless.
You could ask Omar Khadr himself, if you could get anywhere near him.
Andy Worthington is a writer and historian, and author of The Guantánamo
Files.
© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet .org/story/ 74464/
No comments:
Post a Comment