|
U.S. Rejects Prisoner Torture Allegations as International Concern Mounts
 |
| Detained Afghan prisoner
brought to Guantanamo holding facility. |
WASHINGTON, Jan 23 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - The United States on Wednesday rejected charges it was torturing Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners as concern mounted Tuesday over the condition of prisoners held at a U.S. naval base in Cuba, news agencies reported.
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld angrily denied prisoners transported from Afghanistan to a U.S. naval base in Guantanamo, Cuba, were being ill-treated or subjected to torture, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported.
"The treatment of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay is proper, it's humane, it's appropriate, and it is fully consistent with international conventions," Rumsfeld told a Pentagon news conference.
He defended the classification of the detainees as "unlawful combatants," rather than as prisoners of war with certain rights under the Geneva Convention - a categorization that has provoked grave concern from many world leaders and outrage from human rights activists and groups.
More questions were raised after publication of photographs of a group of kneeling, handcuffed prisoners wearing dark goggles, earmuffs, mittens and bright orange jumpsuits.
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said the fact that Washington has linked the prisoners to the September 11 terror attacks that killed more than 3,000 people should make no difference.
"Maintaining our values, our principles and our behavior is fundamental for the ultimate battle against fanaticism and terrorism," Solana said.
But Rumsfeld acknowledged Tuesday intelligence gathering has been given precedence over the swift administration of justice and he gave no indication how long the detainees would be held without charges.
On Tuesday, France and Germany urged Washington to ensure the 158 prisoners transferred from Afghanistan were treated lawfully, and the European Union insisted their rights be protected.
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, whose rights record has been criticized by the United States, accused the Americans of failing to heed their own strictures.
"They used human rights and the rights of prisoners for propaganda purposes against other countries," he was quoted in Iraqi papers as saying. "But when their turn came to uphold those rights, they openly violated them."
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said his government was talking to Washington on the need to deal with the detainees as prisoners of war.
"In the fight against international terrorism, we also defend our basic values," Fischer said in a statement. "They apply whoever the person may be. They protect the life and dignity of men."
French foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero, speaking as a French delegation prepared to travel to Cuba this week, echoed the same theme.
"Whatever their nationality and legal status, we expect these detainees to be given the same guarantees recognized by international law, particularly concerning their conditions of captivity," he told AFP.
Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Pique, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, said prisoners' rights should be respected but added he did not think it necessary for the EU to take an official position.
But the U.S.'s staunchest ally, Britain, insisted Monday concern over the detention of the prisoners was "premature" and said it was satisfied they were being treated properly.
Meanwhile, the International Committee of the Red Cross has sent a delegation to Guantanamo and London-based Amnesty International said Tuesday it had asked the Pentagon for permission to do the same.
"We welcome the Red Cross being there, but we feel it's extremely important for there to be access from other human rights groups so these groups can report publicly on their findings," said Amnesty official Angela Wright.
Amnesty also questioned the impartiality of British officials who attested to the good treatment accorded the three Britons held in Guantanamo.
"There's a lot of unknowns about that visit," said Amnesty research director Claudio Cordone.
"It's not clear who they were. Were they intelligence officers or diplomats? Were the interviews done with the presence of guards? Were they being questioned? Were they told they were suspected of crimes?"
In the U.S. Tuesday, a federal judge said he had serious doubts he would be able to hear the first challenge to the legality of the detentions, having been asked to consider a petition presented by civil rights advocates on behalf of 110 of the detainees, according to the
Los Angeles Times.
Federal Judge Howard Matz had been asked by a group of human rights advocates to order the prisoners to appear in a U.S. civil court to hear the charges against them, saying that Washington's incarceration of the suspects, violates the U.S. Constitution and the Geneva Convention.
But at Tuesday's hearing, Matz declined to rule on the petition and instead heard arguments over whether he had jurisdiction in the case.
"I have grave doubts about whether I have jurisdiction" in the matter, the judge said, referring to the territorial extent of his authority.
The case, filed against U.S. President George W. Bush, Rumsfeld and U.S. military officers, is seen as a crucial test of Washington's handling of the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks on U.S. targets.
The challenge, brought by the Committee of Clergy, Lawyers and Professors, is the first in response to the Bush administration's decision to hold the prisoners at Guantanamo and to try some of them in military tribunals.
"This is a matter that has implicit and obvious importance to the public and system of law," Matz said.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Douglas Axel challenged the court's jurisdiction and called for the case to be dismissed as none of the petitioners or detainees live within the court's realm of power.
But Matz responded that the case would be dismissed only if the government could establish that the court did in fact lack the jurisdiction to hear it.
Setting a new hearing date for February 14, Matz gave the government until January 31 to show why it believes a federal judge in Los Angeles should not hear the case.
In turn, he gave the group's attorney, Stephen Yagman, until February 7 to counter the government's response.
Yagman asked the judge to order that the prisoners not be transferred until the matter is settled, but the judge refused, saying there was "significant doubt as to my authority."
Yagman also warned he may add a so-called "eighth-amendment claim" to his petition that would try to bar the government from inflicting "cruel and unusual punishment" on the prisoners.
Legal experts said the case challenged the legality of the U.S. government's efforts to try terror suspects in military instead of civil courts, and decide whether the detainees were illegal combatants or prisoners of war.
"This case is really designed to test the validity of military trials and, to a lesser extent, the validity of their [the prisoners'] removal from Afghanistan - and third, to challenge the conditions of their detention," Loyola Marymount University law professor Karl Manheim told the
Times.
|
