You are currently browsing posts tagged with congress

US May Have Drugged Detainees in Violation of Nuremberg Code

The Washington Post’s Joby Warrick reports today that

At least two dozen other former and current detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere say they were given drugs against their will or witnessed other inmates being drugged, based on interviews and court documents.

Warrick’s WaPo article gives a vivid account from Adel al-Nusairi, one of the detainees who has come forward.

Nusairi is among a handful of former detainees who directly allege the use of drugs in interrogations at the military prison in Guantanamo. Others described being forcibly given sedatives that knocked them out or made them groggy before being transferred, or being forced to take pills or receive shots for unclear reasons and suffering unusual symptoms afterward. At least one detainee has alleged in a written statement through his attorney that he was drugged after being “renditioned” or transferred by U.S. officials to a prison in Morocco.

Nusairi, in prison interviews in 2005 with Anant Raut, his attorney, described a six-month period in which he says his captors subjected him to drugs and temperature extremes to extract information about al-Qaeda connections they believed he had.

“They thought he was hiding something,” said Raut, who represented Nusairi and other Saudi detainees in 2005 and 2006 while working for the Washington office of the law firm Weil, Gotshal & Manges. “He was injected in the arm with something that made him tired — that made his brain cloudy. When he would try to read the Koran, his brain would not focus. He had unusual lethargy and would drool on himself.”

It was during one such episode, in an interrogation room Nusairi remembers as ice-cold, that he became so desperate for sleep that he signed a confession professing to involvement in al-Qaeda, according to his attorney’s notes. The interrogator watched him sign his name, and “then he smiled and turned off the air conditioner. And I went to sleep,” Nusairi said, according to the notes.

After the confession– which Nusairi later said was a lie — the Saudi remained at Guantanamo Bay for another three years before being turned over to his home country, which released him. “He signed the statement, and they declared him an enemy combatant,” Raut said, “yet they released him anyway with no explanation.” The Saudi Embassy declined to comment.

Nusairi and other detainees’ allegations that they were drugged have enormous ramifications.

“The use of drugs as a form of restraint of prisoners is both unlawful and unethical,” said Leonard Rubenstein, an expert on medical ethics and the president of Physicians for Human Rights. “These allegations demand a full inquiry by Congress and the Department of Justice.”

Scott Allen, a physician and co-director of the Center for Prisoner Health and Human Rights in Providence, R.I, noted that there are no accepted medical standards for the use of drugs to subjugate prisoners. Thus, any such use in interrogations “would have to be considered an experimental use of medicine.”

Medical experimentation on detainees is a violation of the Nuremberg Code. Physicians for Human Rights elaborated on this in a statement today:

The Helsinki Declaration and the Nuremberg Code establish standards for the protection of individual rights in human experimentation, which are largely codified in US law. They absolutely prohibit human experimentation without the consent of the subject. These ethical rules, the Nuremberg Code in particular, were created in response to human experiments conducted by German health professionals on prisoners during World War II. The doctors involved in those human rights abuses were later convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It is all the more telling, then, that one of the Yoo memos released this month contains justifications of drugging:

Written to provide legal justification for interrogation practices, the memo by then-Justice Department lawyer John C. Yoo rejected a decades-old U.S. ban on the use of “mind-altering substances” on prisoners. Instead, he argued that drugs could be used as long as they did not inflict permanent or “profound” psychological damage. U.S. law “does not preclude any and all use of drugs,” Yoo wrote in the memo.

George Bush has recently acknowledged that he knew his senior advisors approved the CIA’s “enhanced” interrogation techniques. Did the Bush advisors also approve a program of drug experimentation on detainees? Is the President directly implicated in violations of the Nuremberg Code’s prohibitions on human experimentation?

§ Posted by Benjamin T. Greenberg on April 22, 2008 at 12:54 am

§ Filed under breaking news, human rights, torture and detention and tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

What Is This You Bring My America?

Last Sunday, the New York Times reported that among hundreds of recently declassified intelligence documents from the 1950s was a 1950 proposal by former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover

to suspend habeas corpus and imprison some 12,000 Americans he suspected of disloyalty….

Hoover wanted President Harry S. Truman to proclaim the mass arrests necessary to “protect the country against treason, espionage and sabotage.” The F.B.I would “apprehend all individuals potentially dangerous” to national security, Hoover’s proposal said. The arrests would be carried out under “a master warrant attached to a list of names” provided by the bureau.

“In order to make effective these apprehensions, the proclamation suspends the Writ of Habeas Corpus,” it said.

The revelation was noted briefly by a couple of major blogs and discussed at some length by smintheus at DailyKos. All have been quick to note the parallels between Hoover’s attempt to suspend Habeas Corpus and the current travails of our fair and essential writ. Both the NY Times and smintheus emphasize that there is no evidence Hoover’s plan was approved.

Smintheus argues that horrible though it was that Truman created loyalty boards, it was to preempt

something even more abusive of civil liberties. Truman also feared that something truly evil might be stirred up by Hoover, whom he loathed. Truman told Clark Clifford on May 2, 1947 that he “wants to be sure and hold FBI down, afraid of ‘Gestapo’”. Truman believed, rightly I think, that Hoover had assembled enough dirt on members of Congress that they would give in to almost any of Hoover’s demands. In fact within hours of taking the oath of office in 1945, the President had his eye on the manipulative Hoover (Hoover had sent over to the White House a young FBI agent from Truman’s home town, to chat the new President up).

So the background to this notorious decision from 1947 illustrates that Truman, far from indifferent to the Bill of Rights, instead believed that he was fighting as best he could on its behalf. His profound skepticism of the FBI Director was both a personal as well as a politically savvy judgment. For all his faults (including cronyism, occasional ineptitude, stubbornness), Truman was at least a very sharp, self-reflective, and principled man. Such a person has the potential to rise above his times.

The impression one gets from reading the Times and smintheus is that though those were dark times, we averted something potentially much worse, in no small part because of Truman’s leadership.

Smintheus may be correct about Truman’s motive and strategy, but I don’t think halting mass detentions actually ameliorates the dangerousness of Hoover’s activities. Then and now, the news that the mass detentions did not occur is something of a red herring.

Actually, Hoover’s proposed suspension of Habeas Corpus and mass detentions is not news. The document reported on in the NY Times is new, but the plans have been known since The Church Committee’s famous 1976 Congressional report on “Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans.”

Mass detentions—as well as illegal surveillance practices by the NSA—should be vigorously opposed, of course. But the fundamental problem is data mining as an approach to intelligence. Data mining is the basis for mass detentions and the emphasis on data mining as a method leads to illegal surveillance activities.

§ Read the rest of this entry…

§ Posted by Benjamin T. Greenberg on December 29, 2007 at 2:00 am

§ Filed under Weblogs, breaking news, civil liberties, civil rights, civil rights movement, human rights, immigrants, katrina, nola, politics, race and racism, torture and detention and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Bad Behavior has blocked 847 access attempts in the last 7 days.