Ask Amnesty: accountability for 'war on terror' abuses
Featured Guest: Geneve MantriFrom our featured guest: "Mr. Geneve Mantri is the Government Relations Director, for Terrorism and Counterterrorism and Human Rights at Amnesty International USA. He is responsible for advocacy for Amnesty International on national security issues including detainees, torture and accountability. Previously he served as a Stimson Center Fellow working with Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN ) on national security issues. He has also served as an Editor at National Defense University, as a consultant to the United Nations Children's Fund and the United Nations Development Program in New York and Eastern Europe. He has also worked as a news producer for Independent Television News in London. He was educated at Warwick University, in the United Kingdom and at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University in Massachusetts. "
Question Submitted by Tatiana:
As a 1st generation American from a father who survived revolution, an early communist gulag as a teen, torture, starvation, loss of family, country, etc., I want to know why in America we continue to torture anyone, or take them abroad to torture them?As first generation American, I more than demand to know why America chose to harm, the lives of any citizen or non-citizen? How can any person be deemed above the law, in effect been excused to have been allowed to indignify another life with such horror and trauma? It strikes in me all the more how much America has done in stepping away from what America has stood for from its inception and law, 'to do no harm'. Why did any legal body in and of America, stand by and allow this to transpire many times over? Why did we allow our law to be changed, by a President who knew what he and his Architects knew was against human rights, and totally illegal? Tatiana
Geneve Mantri answers:
This is a great question, and one to which we do not have a good answer. until we have an impartial accountability process we may never know the full story or be able to confront the truth. There were many people both in and outside government who tried very bravely to resist these policies, and stand up for American values and the rule of law. unfortunately the truth may well be that the process was corralled by a small determined group of people at the highest levels of government who deliberately chose to take America down a very dark path. There is widespread evidence that the abuses that have already been publicised, such as those at Abu Ghraib in the words of the Senate Armed Services Committee were not an aberation or the actions of a few rogue actors, they were the direct result of policies designed developed and sanctioned at the highest levels of the US government.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by Shawn:
Perhaps such an investigation could be framed as an American "Truth & Reconciliation Commission"?
Geneve Mantri answers:
There are many ideas about different forms and mechanisms currently out there and they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Senator Leahy recently called for a commission along these lines, although he was open as to the form and content it would seek to examine. All of these forms have merits and there is much we can learn from other examples. The most important thing is to work towards a process the American people see as independent nonpartisan and get can to the truth.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by Kathy:
Can you explain why there is so much fear around this topic of investigating the lack of accountability? Who does the President listen to when this issue is brought to the table for discussion?
Geneve Mantri answers:
This is a hard path. It is always easier to walk away from the truth, and more comforting to think that the US does not make mistakes and always abides by its own laws and values. The last administration made the choice that rule of law, and the Geneva Conventions were an impediment to confronting terrorism and American values were a luxury that needed to be cast aside. It is no surprise that there are many people who would rather forget what was done in the hope that it will just disappear. Character is taking the hard right and not the easy wrong, unfortunately this is not a lesson that many former officials either understood or lived by.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by Lisa:
It is a relief that the Gitmo prison will be closed, but what, if anything, is being done about the other secret U.S. prisons around the world? What can we do?
Geneve Mantri answers:
The Executive Order on lawful interrogations was a great first step, especially in ordering the closure of secret prisons overseas that were operated by the US government. But this begs the question what have we been doing and why? And what happened to all these people? If we don't know or can't find out the truth then we leave open the door to all these policies coming back again.
It is important to remember that Guantanamo is not just a prison but part of a system, and that entire system needs to be taken down and exposed. We need to leave a legacy of information and understanding about this period that goes beyond closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by Merelyn:
Who will be the investigator? Members of Congress? Do they have the authority to hold hearings and question those high up in the Bush administration - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. ? Other than getting "accountablity" determined, what else could follow from this investigation?
Geneve Mantri answers:
Amnesty International believes that Congress should call for a non-partisan commission to review the treatment of detainees following September 11. The commission should be made up of distinguished American citizens with the experience and capacity to examine and report comprehensively on the policies and actions related to the detention, treatment and transfer of detainees, as well as the consequences of those action. It should also be prepared to make policy recommendations for improvements in this area.
The commission should have the remit to establish and follow the facts where ever they may lead. This should include those officials who designed and developed policies that lead to abuses including Abu Ghraib. It should not be focused on those low ranking individuals who rightly or wrongly carried out the orders and operated in an environment sanctioned by the highest levels of the US government.
Amnesty does not believe that an investigation should offer blanket immunity and they should not preclude a criminal investigation if that is where the facts lead.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by ronald:
I'm uncertain about the definition of torture. What degrees of "persuasion" are "acceptable." Also, if we had been hit with a big catastrophy killing millions,what would our citizens be saying about the failure to stop it?
Geneve Mantri answers:
The definition of torture contained in the Convention against Torture is quite straightforward and has been ratified by 146 countries including the United States:
"Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity."
The physical abuse of Prisoners of War is outlawed under the Geneva Conventions and of criminal suspects by domestic laws. Physical abuse, threats or other forms of coercion are quite simply illegal.
We have weathered far greater catastrophes before - for example, the Civil War, World War One and World War Two - in which greater numbers of Americans have died, without resorting to the use of torture. The use of such methods signals our fear and our weakness to our enemies, and hands them a powerful propaganda tool that they can turn against us guaranteeing in turn the attacks will only continue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by Frank:
Please reconcile for me how killing 3,000 residents of the USA can be handled any other way. Leave it alone. Not everyone is good. Evil exists in this world and someone has to dothe dirty work. Like it or not.
Geneve Mantri answers:
No, in fact since 9-11 the American criminal justice system has successfully tried more than 107 terrorism cases resulting in 145 convictions. The 1993 World Trade Center bombers were convicted in US courts as were the Al Qaeda perpetrators of the 1998 US Embassy bombings in Africa. The courts are perfectly capable of handling complex terrorism cases and preventing the dissemination of classified evidence. How can we make sure that the right people are held accountable and prosecuted? Even without confessions extracted under duress there may be sufficient evidence - not tainted by the abuses individual detainees have suffered in US detention - to charge major figures in the Al Qaeda organization currently in US custody such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubayda. Confessions extracted under duress are inherently unsound and if the administration lacks sufficient evidence, in absence of such confessions, to bring charges then the individuals concerned must be released. This is the same standard we apply to individuals accused of murder, rape, kidnap, armed robbery and acts of terrorism within the United States. The approach adopted by the Bush Administration was ill-conceived, short-sighted and has jeopardized the safety of the American people.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Question Submitted by surj:
Do you really believe that torture will ever stop? Torture has always been there and will always be there, no matter how much we legislate against it,I am against it , but then you have hardened criminals who will not part with information without torture. What other methods are you have in mind?
Geneve Mantri answers:
No, torture has been largely eradicated as an instrument of state policy from the democratic world. Most democratic countries have demonstrated long-term commitment to their obligations under the international Convention against Torture and their own domestic laws. The prohibition of torture is a core American value enshrined in the Bill of Rights (VIII Amendment). The policy of coercive interrogation adopted by the Bush administration was an aberration rather than the norm, and a stain on the reputation of the United States that would have horrified the Founding Fathers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moderator's comment:
Thanks Geneve for answering our questions about Amnesty International's call for an independent commission of inquiry.
The chat has concluded.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
