This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/10/cia-report-prosecutions-international-law-icc

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
CIA report could lead to prosecutions of Americans abroad Senate report on CIA torture could lead to prosecutions of Americans abroad
(35 minutes later)
US officials and other American citizens implicated by the Senate report on torture could face arrest in other countries as a result of investigations by foreign courts, human rights lawyers said on Wednesday.US officials and other American citizens implicated by the Senate report on torture could face arrest in other countries as a result of investigations by foreign courts, human rights lawyers said on Wednesday.
The report, released on Tuesday by the Senate intelligence committee, found the CIA misled the White House, the Justice Department, Congress and the public over a torture programme, launched in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, that was both ineffective and more brutal than the agency disclosed.The report, released on Tuesday by the Senate intelligence committee, found the CIA misled the White House, the Justice Department, Congress and the public over a torture programme, launched in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, that was both ineffective and more brutal than the agency disclosed.
“If I was one of those people I would hesitate before making any travel arrangements,” said Michael Bochenek, the director of law and policy at Amnesty International. “If I was one of those people, I would hesitate before making any travel arrangements,” said Michael Bochenek, director of law and policy at Amnesty International.
The Obama administration wound up an inquiry into criminal responsibility for the use of torture in 2012, without launching any prosecutions and it is unclear whether the Senate report will lead to that decision being reviewed. But because torture is considered a grave crime under international law, other governments could arrest and prosecute anyone implicated in the report who was on their territory under the principle of universal jurisdiction.The Obama administration wound up an inquiry into criminal responsibility for the use of torture in 2012, without launching any prosecutions and it is unclear whether the Senate report will lead to that decision being reviewed. But because torture is considered a grave crime under international law, other governments could arrest and prosecute anyone implicated in the report who was on their territory under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
“Some of these people will never leave US borders again” Bochenek said. “If say, one of them goes on holiday in Paris, then France would have the legal obligation to arrest and prosecute that individual. States have clear obligation in cases of torture,” “Some of these people will never leave US borders again,” Bochenek said. “If say, one of them goes on holiday in Paris, then France would have the legal obligation to arrest and prosecute that individual. States have clear obligation in cases of torture.”
In the most famous case of the application of universal jurisdiction for severe human rights abuses, the former Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet, was arrested in London in 1998 on the basis of an indictment issued by a Spanish court. In 2009, Westminster magistrates court issued an arrest warrant for the former Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni. Israel subsequently demand a change in UK law that would allow her to travel without fear of arrest. In the most famous case of the application of universal jurisdiction for severe human rights abuses, the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet was arrested in London in 1998 on the basis of an indictment issued by a Spanish court. In 2009, Westminster magistrates court issued an arrest warrant for the former Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni. Israel subsequently demanded a change in UK law that would allow her to travel without fear of arrest.
The Senate report will almost certainly be assessed by the International Criminal Court as part of a preliminary examination of US treatment of detainees in Afghanistan. However, it is currently seen as unlikely that the ICC’s inquiry will lead to charges against the US officials involved in the torture programme, for both legal and political reasons. The Senate report will almost certainly be assessed by the international criminal court as part of a preliminary examination of US treatment of detainees in Afghanistan. However, it is currently seen as unlikely that the ICC’s inquiry will lead to charges against the US officials involved in the torture programme, for both legal and political reasons.
“Certain of the enhanced interrogation techniques apparently approved by US senior commanders in Afghanistan in the period from February 2003 through June 2004, could, depending on the severity and duration of their use, amount to cruel treatment, torture or outrages upon personal dignity as defined under international jurisprudence,” the ICC prosecutor’s office said in an annual report on its activities. “Certain of the enhanced interrogation techniques apparently approved by US senior commanders in Afghanistan in the period from February 2003 through [to]June 2004, could, depending on the severity and duration of their use, amount to cruel treatment, torture or outrages upon personal dignity as defined under international jurisprudence,” the ICC prosecutor’s office said in an annual report on its activities.
Earlier this month, the Hague-based court revealed for the first time that it was looking into the potential US torture of detainees in Afghanistan. “In addition, there is information available that interrogators allegedly committed abuses that were outside the scope of any approved techniques, such as severe beating, especially beating on the soles of the feet, suspension by the wrists, and threats to shoot or kill,” the prosecutor’s office said. Earlier this month, the court, which is based in The Hague, revealed for the first time that it was looking into the potential US torture of detainees in Afghanistan. “In addition, there is information available that interrogators allegedly committed abuses that were outside the scope of any approved techniques, such as severe beating, especially beating on the soles of the feet, suspension by the wrists, and threats to shoot or kill,” the prosecutor’s office said.
Bochenek said that the ICC inquiry represented “the most obvious way the report would enter the ICC’s jurisdiction”. The nearly 500 pages of the Senate report, including newly declassified memos, would be examined by the prosecutor’s offices to assess how widespread the use of torture was and who could be held criminally responsible, but the preliminary examination would have to pass several legal and procedural hurdles before it could proceed to a full investigation. Bochenek said that the ICC inquiry represented “the most obvious way the report would enter the ICC’s jurisdiction”.
The prosecutors would have to make a call on whether the scale of the abuse warranted judgement from an international court established to prosecute “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”. The Senate report mentions 39 known cases of enhanced interrogation techniques, only some of which took place in Afghanistan. There are no exact benchmarks for the ICC’s jurisdiction, but it has tended to examine mass crimes involving many thousands of victims. The 500-page Senate report, which includes newly declassified memos, would be examined by the prosecutor’s offices to assess how widespread the use of torture was and who could be held criminally responsible, but the preliminary examination would have to pass several legal and procedural hurdles before it could proceed to a full investigation.
“The ICC was designed to end impunity for the most egregious and shocking breaches of the law, and it is hard to see how alleged detainee abuse by US forces meets that standard,” Ryan Vogel, an assistant professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law and former policy advisor to the US defence secretary, argued on the Lawfare Blog. The prosecutors would have to make a call on whether the scale of the abuse warranted judgment from an international court established to prosecute “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”. The Senate report mentions 39 known cases of enhanced interrogation techniques, only some of which took place in Afghanistan. There are no exact benchmarks for the ICC’s jurisdiction, but it has tended to examine mass crimes involving many thousands of victims.
However, Bochenek argued that the significance of the US torture programme went beyond simple numbers of victims. “This was the world’s only superpwer that has carried out a programe of torture and tried it cover it up in a reprehensible way and recruited the help of some 50 other countries in the programme. “The ICC was designed to end impunity for the most egregious and shocking breaches of the law, and it is hard to see how alleged detainee abuse by US forces meets that standard,” Ryan Vogel, an assistant professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law and former policy adviser to the US defence secretary, argued on the Lawfare Blog.
However, Bochenek argued that the significance of the US torture programme went beyond simple numbers of victims. “This was the world’s only superpower that has carried out a programme of torture and tried it cover it up in a reprehensible way and recruited the help of some 50 other countries in the programme.”
Vogel also pointed out that, on the principle of complementarity, the ICC prosecutors would have to demonstrate that the US was unwilling or unable to prosecute the abuses itself. The ICC would have to show that the American process was essentially a sham. The prosecutor’s office alluded to these obstacles, saying it was “analysing the relevance and genuineness of national proceedings by the competent national authorities for the alleged conduct described above as well as the gravity of the alleged crimes”.Vogel also pointed out that, on the principle of complementarity, the ICC prosecutors would have to demonstrate that the US was unwilling or unable to prosecute the abuses itself. The ICC would have to show that the American process was essentially a sham. The prosecutor’s office alluded to these obstacles, saying it was “analysing the relevance and genuineness of national proceedings by the competent national authorities for the alleged conduct described above as well as the gravity of the alleged crimes”.
Furthermore, the US is not a state party to the ICC. Bill Clinton signed the Rome statute establishing the court during his last days in office in 2000, but his successor, George W Bush, withdrew US assent, in essence “unsigning” the document. Furthermore, the US is not a state party to the ICC. Bill Clinton signed the Rome statute establishing the court during his last days in office in 2000, but his successor, George W Bush, withdrew US assent to the document.
The Afghan government could request an ICC investigation as it is a state party to the statute and the abuses were committed on its soil, but Kabul is an American ally and dependent on US economic and military support. An ICC investigation would also look at abuses by all parties in Afghanistan over a given period, including the Kabul government.The Afghan government could request an ICC investigation as it is a state party to the statute and the abuses were committed on its soil, but Kabul is an American ally and dependent on US economic and military support. An ICC investigation would also look at abuses by all parties in Afghanistan over a given period, including the Kabul government.