US HOUSE MEMBERS SEEK WAR CRIMES INQUIRY!

[Guest guest]

T

Fri, 13 May 2005 15:05:23 -0700 (PDT)

US HOUSE MEMBERS SEEK WAR CRIMES INQUIRY!

 

 

 

 

US HOUSE MEMBERS SEEK WAR CRIMES INQUIRY!

 

'WAR CRIMES'

51 House members call on Gonzales to appoint special counsel on

alleged U.S. 'war crimes'

 

Congressman John Conyers will be issuing a letter cosigned by roughly

50 House members calling for a special prosecutor to investigate

claims that the U.S. has violated the War Crimes Act at secret

detention facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, RAW

STORY has learned.

 

The following letter will be issued shortly.

 

###

 

May 12, 2005

 

 

The Honorable Alberto R. Gonzales

Attorney General of the United States

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

 

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

 

We are writing to request that you appoint a special counsel to

investigate whether high-ranking officials within the Bush

Administration violated the War Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. 2441, or the

Anti-Torture Act, 18 U.S.C. 2340 by allowing the use of torture

techniques banned by domestic and international law at recognized and

secret detention sites in Iraq, Afghanistan Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere.

 

One year and 10 investigations after we first learned about the

atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib, there has yet to be a

comprehensive, neutral and objective investigation with prosecutorial

authority of who is ultimately responsible for the abuses there and

elsewhere. While more than 130 low-ranking officers and enlisted

soldiers have been disciplined or face courts-martial for the abuses

that occurred, there have been no criminal charges against

high-ranking officials. Yet the pattern of abuse across several

countries did not result from the acts of individual soldiers who

broke the rules. It resulted from decisions made by senior U.S.

officials to bend, ignore, or cast rules aside. If the United States

is to wipe away the stain of Abu Ghraib, it needs to investigate those

at the top who ordered or condoned torture. As a result, it is in our

interest to finally show the world that we are taking these matters

seriously and resolving them free of political taint.

 

Some of us previously asked Attorney General Ashcroft to appoint a

special counsel to investigate these abuses on May 20, 2004.

Unfortunately, we received no answer to our request. The need for a

special counsel is now more important than ever as the Administration

and military have repeatedly exonerated high-ranking officials, or

declined to even investigate their actions, even as other official

investigations linked the policy decisions by these officials to the

crimes that occurred at Abu Ghraib. The Administration's haphazard and

disjointed approach to these investigations appears to have insulated

those in command and prevented a full account of the actions and

abuses from being determined.

 

As you know, under Department of Justice regulations, the Attorney

General must appoint a special counsel when (1) a " criminal

investigation of a person or matter is warranted, " (2) the

investigation " by a United States Attorney Office or litigating

Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of

interest for the Department, " and (3) " it would be in the public

interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume

responsibility for the matter. " 1 In the present case, all three

requirements have been met.

 

First, federal criminal laws are clearly implicated. The Anti-Torture

Act criminalizes acts of torture - including attempts to commit

torture and conspiracy to commit an act of torture - occurring outside

the United States' territorial jurisdiction regardless of the

citizenship of the perpetrator or victim.2 The Geneva Conventions

generally prohibit " violence to life and persons, " " outrages upon

personal dignity, " and " humiliating and degrading treatment. " 3

Violations of the Geneva Conventions also constitute a violation of

U.S. federal criminal law under the War Crimes Act.4 The

Administration has acknowledged on several occasions that the United

States is bound by the Geneva Conventions with respect to Iraqi5 and

Taliban prisoners,6 and that a violation of the Conventions would

invite prosecution under the War Crimes Act.7 Numerous investigations

have uncovered such violations. The Taguba report found instances of

" sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses " of prisoners.8 The

Army's Inspector General's report found 94 incidents of detainee abuse

at detention sites in Afghanistan and Iraq.9 And, the Schlesinger

report confirmed five instances in which detainees died as a result of

abuse by U.S. personnel during interrogations.10 The repudiation of

the August 2002 memorandum you wrote as White House Counsel in

December of 2004 suggests even the Administration realizes its

policies contributed to actions which violated federal criminal law.11

 

Therefore, given the Administration's concession that the Geneva

Conventions apply to Iraqi and Taliban prisoners, given its concession

in the Gonzalez memo that a violation of the Conventions would also

constitute a violation of federal criminal law, and given the flagrant

violations of the Conventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay

which have been confirmed by official investigations, it is clear that

a prima facie violation of federal criminal law exists. It is also

evident that high-ranking Administration officials, including the

Defense Secretary, as well as high-ranking military officials, may

have authorized these actions and are potentially subject to criminal

prosecution as well.

 

Second, there is an obvious conflict of interest. A special counsel is

necessary not only because high-ranking Administration officials,

including Cabinet members, are implicated, but also because you

personally, and the Department of Justice generally, may have

participated in this conspiracy to violate the War Crimes Act. It has

been confirmed that the Department of Justice's Office of Legal

Counsel, and you yourself as White House Counsel, encouraged the

president to withhold Geneva Convention protections from Afghanistan

and Guantanamo Bay detainees. If the conflict of interest provisions

in your regulations mean anything, it is that when the Attorney

General may have contributed to the abuses that were committed, the

Department of Justice has no business conducting the investigation and

should instead turn to a special counsel.

 

Finally, there can be no doubt that the public interest will be served

by a broad and independent investigation into both the allegations of

abuse at U.S. detention sites as well as the role of high-ranking

officials in authorizing and allowing these abuses. To date, a number

of investigations into allegations of abuse at United States detention

sites have been conducted, including ten official investigations.

These investigations concluded that the leadership failure of officers

such as Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, formerly the senior commander in

Iraq, contributed to the prisoner abuse.

 

 

For example, the Army Inspector General and former Defense Secretary

James Schlesinger found in separate reports that the policies issued

by Lt. Gen. Sanchez and his subsequent actions once the abuses at Abu

Ghraib were known contributed to the perpetration of these abuses. The

Schlesinger investigation also found that other top military officials

were responsible, concluding, " There is both institutional and

personal responsibility at higher levels. " 12 Similarly, the

Kern-Fay-Jones report concluded that the actions of Sanchez and his

most senior deputies, such as Maj. Gen. Walter Wojdakowski, " did

indirectly contribute " to some abuses.13 However, these inquiries were

not empowered to impose punishments on those it found culpable, and

they were not empowered to examine the role of high-ranking officials,

including members of the Administration, in the perpetuation of these

abuses.14 And, in spite of these findings, many of the reports refused

to hold these high-ranking officials culpable. In fact, we recently

learned the Army absolved four top officers, including Lt. Gen.

Sanchez, of wrongdoing. To date, only one high-ranking military

officer has been punished as a result of these inquiries, and many

view her punishment as a mere slap on the wrist. As a result, it is

not yet clear to the world that the United States is taking these

abuses seriously.

 

The public interest demands we determine who is ultimately responsible

for these abuses. While Private Lynndie England and other low-ranking

officers have pled guilty, those who ordered and authorized their

actions appear to have been protected by the military and this

Administration. Because so many high level officials, including you,

have been implicated in these events, the only way to ensure

impartiality is through the appointment of a Special Counsel. Indeed,

our nation's integrity is at stake. We must reassure the world that we

will fairly and independently pursue legal violations wherever they occur.

 

We await your response on this important matter. At no point during

this Administration has a Special Counsel been appointed.15 Please

contact us through Perry Apelbaum or Ted Kalo of the Judiciary Staff

at 2142 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 if you

have any questions about this request.

 

Sincerely,

 

1. Rep. Tammy Baldwin

2. Rep. Sanford Bishop

3. Rep. Earl Blumenauer

4. Rep. Corrine Brown

5. Rep. Julia Carson

6. Rep. John Conyers

7. Rep. Elijah Cummings

8. Rep. A. Davis

9. Rep. S. Davis

10. Rep. Diana DeGette

11. Rep. Anna Eshoo

12. Rep. Barney Frank

13. Rep. Raul Grijalva

14. Rep. Luis Guitierrez

15. Rep. Maurice Hinchey

16. Rep. Michael Honda

17. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee

18. Rep. Ron Kind

19. Rep. Dennis Kucinich

20. Rep. Barbara Lee

21. Rep. Zoe Lofgren

22. Rep. Carolyn Maloney

23. Rep. Betty McCollum

24. Rep. Jim McDermott

25. Rep. James McGovern

26. Rep. Gregory Meeks

27. Rep. James Moran

28. Rep. Jerrold Nadler

29. Rep. James Oberstar

30. Rep. John Olver

31. Rep. Frank Pallone

32. Rep. Donald Payne

33. Rep. Tom Price

34. Rep. Martin Sabo

35. Rep. Linda Sanchez

36. Rep. Bernard Sanders

37. Rep. Janice Schakowsky

38. Rep. Bobby Scott

39. Rep. Jose Serrano

40. Rep. Louise Slaughter

41. Rep. Hilda Solis

42. Rep. Fortney Stark

43. Rep. Ellen Tauscher

44. Rep. Mark Udall

45. Rep. Chris VanHollen

46. Rep. Maxine Waters

47. Rep. Diane Watson

48. Rep. Melvin Watt

49. Rep. Robert Wexler

50. Rep. Lynn Woolsey

51. Rep. David Wu

 

http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/conyers_war_crimes_513

 

posted Friday, 13 May 2005

 

http://mparent7777.blog-city.com/read/1276342.htm