June 2004

 

Dear Activist,

 

Amnesty International is pleased to issue the second quarterly bulletin as a resource to all who are concerned about human rights in the context of the Bush Administration's "war on terror."

 

The "war on terror" has led to the creation and passage of new laws and regulations in the United States; similar laws have proliferated around the world, steadily chipping away at the human rights standards that once seemed guaranteed. Laws, regulations and court cases pertaining to the "war on terror" are numerous and evolve quickly. Amnesty International is focusing its work on the myriad human rights issues that have arisen or intensified in the last two years, since the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001. These include: indefinite detention without charge or legal status, torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees, racial profiling, rendering of prisoners to countries that torture, and an ever-growing body of legislation that imposes greater restrictions on civil liberties and human rights. Amnesty International believes that respecting human rights is one of the best ways to protect national security.

 

This bulletin is quarterly and intended to provide updates reviewing the status of the issues that concern AIUSA activists interested in "war on terror" human rights issues. For more information contact Ms. Jumana Musa, Advocacy Director for Domestic Human Rights and International Justice in the Government Relations program, at 202-544-0200, or send an email to wot@aiusa.org.

 

Attached you will find:

 

Raise Your Voice – This section highlights some recent activities by Amnesty International members nationwide raising human rights concerns in the "war on terror."

 

Individual Case Update – This section updates the status of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen deported by the United States to Syria, where he reports was held and tortured.

 

Legislative Update – This section will update activists on the status of a number of pieces of legislation pertaining to the USA PATRIOT Act and the "war on terror."

 

Court Docket Update – This section reviews the progress of many of the cases that have been brought on behalf of detainees of the "war on terror" both in the US and abroad.

 

Policy and Regulation Update – This section is a review of relevant US policies and regulations pertaining to the "war on terror."

 

Take Action Now: Resources and Activities for Members – A page of links to web actions, reports and tools for Amnesty International activists.

 

 

Raise Your Voice: Recent Activities by Amnesty International Members

 

 

Activists in front of the US Supreme Court5

 

 

Supreme Court hears the case of detainees in Guantanamo Bay – April 20, 2004

 

On April 20, 2004, The Supreme Court heard arguments in the cases of Rasul v. Bush and Al Odah v. Bush, two cases brought on behalf of detainees in Guantanamo Bay. Amnesty International activists, in coalition with other local activists, demonstrated outside the court and took the opportunity to educate the public about the fate of the detainees.

 

Activists were outside the court all morning, handing out leaflets detailing AIUSA concerns about the ongoing indefinite detentions in Guantanamo Bay. A number of activists donned orange jumpsuits, as many of the detainees are forced to do. The "detainees" handed out ½ page narratives including personal details of some of the people currently detained in Guantanamo or recently released. The narratives were drawn from AI reports relaying information obtained from interviews with detainees who were recently released, and from the case files that AI has been compiling on specific detainees still in custody.

 

Director of Government Relations Alex Arriaga spoke to the crowd about the human rights concerns arising from the detentions in Guantanamo Bay, and Kit Gage from the First Amendment Foundation spoke about the way in which the detentions violated US obligations under US law. "Detainees" read their stories over the sound system from behind cardboard "prisons," and Jumana Musa, Advocacy Director of Domestic Human Rights and International Justice, read a poem written by a Yemeni detainee's brother about the effect of his detention on their mother.

 

To read the Case Sheets of Detainees in Guantanamo Bay, go to:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/document.do?id=48E3B5EB67C8EDD380256E270058127A

 

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/document.do?id=75AC58864FBF463680256E40004794B9

 

To read interviews from detainees released from Guantanamo Bay in AI's latest report, go to:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510612004

 

DSCN1510DSCN1489
Supreme Court hears the case of Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi, April 28, 2004

 

On April 28th, the Supreme Court considered whether or not President Bush has the authority to designate US citizens as "enemy combatants" at his exclusive discretion and hold them in indefinite incommunicado detention in the cases of Rumsfeld v. Padilla and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. Jose Padilla is a US citizen who was detained in Chicago in May 2002, then designated and "enemy combatant" in June 2002 and transferred to military custody. Yaser Esam Hamdi is a US citizen who was picked up in Afghanistan and taken to Guantanamo Bay, later being transferred to a naval brig in South Carolina when it was discovered he was a US citizen.

While the cases were being heard, Amnesty International activists in coalition with a number of national and local groups demonstrated outside the court and participated in street theater. Carrying signs that read "Everyone Deserves a Fair Trial," "Extend Constitutional Rights to US Citizens," and "Enemy Combatants – Who Decides?" activists handed out information sheets to pedestrians and tourists walking by the court.

 

During the street theater, people representing Constitutional amendments were approached by a "Head of State" who would demand to know who they were and what they were doing. The "amendments" would read their text, the head of state would declare that they were threatening national security and interfering with the "war on terror" and then designate them as an "enemy combatant." Then "military personnel" would drag the Constitutional amendments off to a "Naval Brig." The first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and fourteenth amendments were "detained." Upon each "amendment's" detention, a man dressed as Thomas Jefferson in a casket would groan and roll over, declaring "What are you doing to the Bill of Rights!?!"

 

After the street theater, there was a slate of speakers including Alex Arriaga, Amnesty International's Director of Government Relations, along with representatives from the First Amendment Foundation, the American Friends Services Committee, the Council on American Islamic Relations, Refuse and Resist, and the Blue Triangle Network. Koyuki Yip, one of the coalition members who helped plan the demonstration, read portions of an amicus brief filed by Fred Korematsu, a Japanese American interned during WWII whose case reached the Supreme Court and also spoke about her grandparents internment during WWII. Jumana Musa, Amnesty International's Advocacy Director for Domestic Human Rights and International Justice, moderated the event and rallied the crowd.

 

Individual Case Update

 

Ahmad Abu Ali

 

Amnesty International is concerned about the status of Ahmed Abu Ali, a United States citizen currently imprisoned in al-Ha'ir prison in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He was reportedly arrested by Saudi Arabian authorities on June 11, 2003 in the city of Medina, while taking an exam at the Islamic University there, and has been held in Riyadh ever since. It is not clear whether he has been charged with a crime, nor is it clear when, or if, he will be put on trial.  

 

US officials have been interested in Ahmed Abu Ali because of an alleged connection to a now concluded Virginia terrorism case. During the July 2003 bail hearing of Sabri Benkhala, one of the Virginia defendants, Ahmed Abu Ali was mentioned as an associate of his, and it was alleged that Ahmed Abu Ali had confessed to belonging to al-Qaeda during Saudi Arabian interrogations observed by the FBI. Ahmed Abu Ali denied to his family that he had ever made such a confession, and the allegation was not repeated during the March 2004 trial, where Sabri Benkhala was acquitted of all charges.

 

The US consul failed to visit Ahmed Abu Ali until almost a month after his detention. During a September 2003 interrogation by FBI officials, Ahmed Abu Ali was reportedly threatened with being declared an "enemy combatant" and being sent to Guantanamo Bay, or with a trial in Saudi Arabia where he would have no legal defense. After that encounter, Ahmed Abu Ali was placed in solitary confinement for three months. Between November 2003 and February 2004, the US consul halted the monthly visits he had been making. During this time, Ahmed Abu Ali was told by Saudi Arabian authorities that his trial was approaching. US officials have not facilitated legal representation for Ahmed Abu Ali, nor have they discovered what, if anything, he has been charged with.

 

The State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2003 states that Saudi Arabian security forces "tortured detainees" and that "torture and abuse were used to obtain confessions from prisoners." The report also cites " … credible reports that security forces continued to torture and abuse detainees and prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, and hold them in incommunicado detention." As information or confessions are often extracted under this kind of duress, the failure of United States consular authorities to visit Ahmed Abu Ali promptly after his initial detention, or to regularly visit him since then, has put him at increased risk of these abuses.

 

To write to US authorities and express your concerns, go to:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10859

 

To write to Saudi Arabian authorities and express your concerns, go to:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10860

 

 

 

 

 

Legislative Update

 

The Durbin Torture Amendment

 

Senator Richard Durbin (IL) introduced an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill to reaffirm US commitment to the Geneva Conventions, the Convention Against Torture, and the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, and to affirm unequivocally the prohibition against torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The notorious photos taken at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq demonstrate that U.S. personnel have been responsible for acts of torture and other forms of abuse, in violation of the US commitments under domestic and international law. Amnesty International is asking activists to call their Senators to insure the Durbin Torture Amendment receives strong, bipartisan support and sends a message around the world that the U.S. opposes such abuse and will uphold international standards for human rights.

 

The United States agreed to a prohibition on torture and ill-treatment when it became a party to the Geneva Conventions, International Covenant to Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture. Through ratification of these conventions, the United States vowed that no person in US custody anywhere in the world would be subjected to the "cruel, unusual and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the 5th, 8th, and/or 14th Amendments to the Constitution" of the United States. The Senate must assure the international community that the United States is committed to the longstanding prohibitions to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

 

To learn more about the Durbin Torture Amendment and to take action, go to:

Email/Fax: http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10902

Text of the amendment: http://www.amnestyusa.org/actioncenter/files/durbin_torture_amendment.pdf

 

CLEAR Act (HR 2671) and Homeland Security Enhancement Act (S 1906)

 

The House of Representatives introduced the "Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act" (CLEAR Act) in July, 2003. Sponsored by Congressman Charlie Norwood (R-GA), the bill would extend authority to state and local police forces to enforce civil immigration law, allowing them to investigate, apprehend, detain and deport undocumented immigrants. The danger inherent in such a system is that it treats violators of civil immigration infractions the same as those who violate criminal infractions of immigration law, criminalizing immigrants for even the most minor violation. It is likely to encourage racial profiling in law enforcement, leading officers to stop anyone who speaks with an accent or appears to be an immigrant.

 

As of May 28, 2004, 122 members of Congress have co-sponsored the CLEAR Act, and the House Judiciary Committee has held a hearing on it. Although the bill is opposed by a growing number of law enforcement groups, immigrants rights groups, civil rights groups and human rights groups, it is thought that the bill will be marked up in committee this summer and it may have the votes to pass out of committee.

Shortly before Thanksgiving, the Senate introduced its version of the CLEAR Act, calling it, "The Homeland Security Enhancement Act" (HSEA), which currently has 4 co-sponsors. The Senate bill was crafted to respond to some of the criticisms of the House version. Rather than authorizing state and local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws, the Senate version, sponsored by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), builds on a 2002 Department of Justice advisory opinion that states that local and state police have inherent authority to enforce immigration violations, despite a previous 1996 Department of Justice ruling to the contrary. It also provides for training of officers, training manuals and pocket guides, building more INS federal detention facilities and maintaining standards for violators of immigration law who are held temporarily by local or state law enforcement.

 

The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Citizenship held hearings on HSEA on April 22, 2004. Senators Saxby Chambliss (R – GA), Jeff Sessions (R – AL), John Cornyn (R – TX), and Edward Kennedy (D – MA) were present. Chris Kobach, a former Department of Justice attorney who wrote the 2002 advisory opinion on the matter and the author of HSEA, testified, along with two others who supported the legislation and one witness who was opposed.   The hearing was not well attended, but it did make it clear that HSEA is being promoted as the more reasonable alternative to CLEAR. Amnesty International is working in coalition with a broad spectrum of groups to oppose this legislation. For more information on these two bills, or to send letters to your Representative and Senators, go to http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10419.

 

To read the testimony of the witnesses at the April 22, 2004 Senate hearing, go to: http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1156

 

SAFE Act (S 1709, HR 3352)

 

The "Security and Freedom Ensured Act" was introduced by a bi-partisan group of Senators including Senator Larry Craig (D-ID), Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), Senator Michael Crapo (R-ID), Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI), Senator John Sununu (R-NH), Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR). The SAFE Act seeks to roll back sections of the USA PATRIOT Act pertaining to sneak and peek searches, wiretapping and access to library records, and impose sunset provisions on other sections that did not sunset. This legislation is an attempt by Congress to reinforce laws that protect civil liberties and human rights, limiting law enforcement's authority to search through private files and monitor individuals without meaningful judicial review and due process protection.

 

The House introduced its version of the SAFE Act in October of 2003, sponsored by Congressman Butch Otter (R – ID). The House bill included many of the same provisions as the Senate version, but also modifies the very broad definition of "domestic terrorism" established by the USA PATRIOT Act. The broad definition of the crime of "domestic terrorism" may have a chilling effect on first amendment rights or free speech and association.

 

Attorney General John Ashcroft has said he and others in the Administration will recommend that President Bush veto the bill if it passes the Congress. There is currently little movement on the SAFE Act, but the Administration has gone on the offensive.

 

President Bush has made a number of high profile public speeches recently calling for the extension of all PATRIOT Act provisions that are set to expire at the end of next year. This means that although things are currently at a standstill, the process could be resurrected at any moment, since the Administration seems determined to make this a campaign issue.

 

To learn more about the SAFE Act, go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/patriotact/index.html

 

To write your Representative or Senator in support of the SAFE Act go to:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10554

 

End Racial Profiling Act

 

Prior to September 11, 2001, Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) and Representative John Conyers (D-MI) were working to pass the End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) addressing racial profiling of historic minorities in the United States, i.e. African Americans, Hispanic / Latino Americans and Native Americans. Although the bill was set aside after September 11th, 2001, Senator Feingold and Congressman Conyers released a revamped End Racial Profiling Act bill that also addresses the rampant profiling that has occurred in the name of the "war on terror." The new bill includes examples of racial profiling from post September 11th law enforcement activities and designates religion as a protected class, along with race, ethnicity and national origin. The bill was introduced on February 26, 2004, the third anniversary of President Bush's campaign promise to end racial profiling.

 

There has been a great deal of other activity regarding racial profiling in Congress. In the Senate, Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) and John Breaux (D-LA) have introduced the Uniting Neighborhoods and Individuals To Eliminate Racial Profiling Act, or UNITE, (S. 2112) which also addresses the issue of racial profiling. The UNITE bill has some strong enforcement provisions, but falls far short of the protections and remedies offered by ERPA. However, introduction of the bill is viewed as a very positive step and further indication of Congressional recognition of the need to take action on racial profiling. Members of a broad coalition of groups including Amnesty International have been meeting with staff members from Breaux and Voinovich's office to strengthen the UNITE bill, while still promoting the ERPA.

 

In the House, delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D - DC) successfully amended the transportation bill to include funding for law enforcement to collect racial profiling data. Collecting data detailing the race, ethnicity, national origin and religion of people who are stopped by the police is a critical component of assessing and addressing racial profiling. The House and Senate still have to reconcile their transportation bills, and it remains to be seen whether or not the amendment will survive the conference process.

 

Amnesty International traveled the United States in 2003, organizing a series of public hearings and collecting hundreds of pages of testimony about racial profiling. Amnesty International will release a report highlighting the stories of profiling from around the country in September 2004.

 

To learn more about ERPA go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/racial_profiling/index.do

 

To encourage your Representative or Senator to co-sponsor the bill, go to:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10626.

 

To get posters, stickers and other campaign materials, e-mail usa@aiusa.org.

 

Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act of 2003

 

Introduced by Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Porter Goss (R-FL), the Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act (HR 3179) is a bill that would expand the use of secret evidence and secret intelligence gathering. The bill would also create new penalties for people who fail to comply with orders to turn over records (such as library records) or those who would inform people that their records were turned over to authorities.

 

This contested bill was part of the never introduced "PATRIOT II" bill, and there have been many attempts to push it through committee lately. First there was an attempt to mark it up in committee without first holding a hearing. The House is considering moving this complex and controversial legislation behind closed doors. Congressional Quarterly reported two weeks ago that Rep. Goss is considering slipping HR 3179 into the intelligence authorization bill so it can be marked up in closed session. The Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act of 2003 (H.R. 3179) is scheduled for mark up the week of June 14. AIUSA will be monitoring this bill closely and may issue an online action in the near future.

 

Court Update

 

US "Enemy Combatants" – US Citizens Detained and Denied Due Process Rights

 

Three people are currently held in the United States as "enemy combatants": Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla who are both US citizens, and Ali Aleh Kahlah al-Mari who is a Qatari national.

 

On April 28th, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the cases of Donald Rumsfeld v. Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi v. Donald Rumsfeld. The cases were heard separately, and a decision is expected in late June or early July. Yaser Esam Hamdi was captured by the US forces in Afghanistan and transferred to Guantanamo Bay where he was held until the government discovered that he was an American citizen. He was then transferred to a Naval brig in the United States where he remains in detention. Jose Padilla was accused of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb. The President designated him an "enemy combatant" in June 2002 and had him removed from the criminal justice system and transferred to military custody.

 

In both the Hamdi and Padilla cases, lawyers have challenged the President's assertion that the President – at his sole discretion – has authority to designate US citizens as "enemy combatants," to hold US citizens indefinitely and without charge or access to an attorney, and to prevent a US citizen designated by the President as an "enemy combatant" from challenging the designation in court as a matter of due process. In addition to the arguments above, the lawyers of Jose Padilla maintain that the President does not have the Constitutional authority to imprison a US citizen as an "enemy combatant" when he was arrested on US soil and away from any field of combat.

 

Both Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla have had limited visits with their respective attorneys and the visits were heavily monitored by US government officials. According US government officials, Hamdi and Padilla were granted access to their attorneys at the government's discretion, not in recognition of constitutional rights. Both remain in indefinite detention.

 

Recently, Deputy Attorney General James Comey outlined the government's case against Jose Padilla in an apparent attempt to generate support for the notion that it was necessary to keep Padilla detained without granting him any of his constitutional rights. In listing the types of actions that Padilla was accused of plotting, Comey admitted that all information was obtained without a lawyer present and therefore unusable in court. In making the circular argument that they would have to continue to deny Padilla his rights because they had denied him his rights, Comey stated, "We do not have any plans to present this, the information I have given you today, to a grand jury … I don't believe we could use this information in a criminal case, because we deprived him of access to his counsel and questioned him in the absence of counsel."

 

Ali Aleh Kahlah al-Mari is a Qatari national who was accused of being an Al Qaeda sleeper agent and designated an "enemy combatant" by President Bush in June 2003. Al-Mari has no access to an attorney and remains in indefinite detention. Since the cases before the Supreme Court involve on US citizens designated as "enemy combatants" and held in the United States, the court decisions may not help clarify al-Mari's detention.  

 

For updates on these cases, go to http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp.

 

 

Guantanamo Bay

 

Over 600 detainees from over 40 countries are being held by the United States in Guantanamo Bay, all designated enemy combatants in the "war in terror." Some were picked up in Afghanistan during the war, others were detained in other countries and then transferred to Guantanamo Bay. Nations around the world have criticized the United States for the manner in which it has held over 600 prisoners, without legal status, charge or representation.

 

On April 20, 2004, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the cases of Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, and David Hicks vs. President Bush and Fawzi Khalid Abdullah Fahad Al Odah vs. The United States on the issue of whether people detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba have the right to challenge their detention in US courts. The Rasul case was brought on behalf of Shafiq Rasul and Asif Iqbal, two British detainees, and David Hicks, an Australian detainee. The Al Odah case was brought on behalf of twelve Kuwaiti nationals. Lower courts dismissed the claim, holding that US courts had no jurisdiction over their claims. A decision by the Supreme Court is expected in late June or early July, and the conventional wisdom is that the US government will not bring any of the detainees before military tribunals until the Supreme Court issues its decision.

 

The Bush Administration has argued that the detainees are not POW's as defined by the Geneva Conventions, and therefore not guaranteed certain rights, such as the right to have your case reviewed to determine whether the initial designation of POW was accurate. The Administration has also said that since the detainees were not in the United States, constitutional protections do not apply and detainees do not have standing in US courts. Finally, the Administration has stated that these detainees could be tried and executed by military tribunals. When human rights and civil rights groups have argued on behalf of the Guantanamo detainees in US courts, the US government has challenged their ability to raise these cases arguing that these groups do not have standing to sue on the detainees' behalf. Detainees have been held in this legal purgatory for more than two years, since January 2002 and their families, have been turned over to military interrogators.

 

On several occasions, the Administration has announced that trials of the detainees by military tribunals were imminent. Six people have been identified for trial by military commission to date and two have been charged. It is thought that none of the trials will go forward until after the Supreme Court has issued its decision.

 

For information and to take action on behalf of the Guantanamo Bay detainees go to:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/guantanamo/

 

To write to President Bush about the status of detainees in Guantanamo Bay, go to:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10552

 

For information on the Rasul and Al-Odah cases, go to: www.ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp

 

To hear the oral arguments before the Supreme Court, go to:

http://www.c-span.org/videoarchives.asp?CatCodePairs=Series%2CAC

 

 

Regulation and Policy Updates

 

Detainees in Iraq

 

Amnesty International has long expressed concern about the treatment of detainees held in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo. Recently, more details have emerged about allegations of abuse and torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. When Iraq was ruled by Saddam Hussein, Abu Ghraib prison was so feared and associated with torture that even family of detainees were afraid to come to the prison to inquire about their loved ones. Pictures recently aired on "60 Minutes II" and in various US newspapers indicate to many Iraqis that the legacy of Abu Ghraib continues. Detained Iraqis were photographed naked in sexually humiliating positions, hooded, hooked to wires they were told would electrocute them if they moved, or facing menacing, unmuzzled military dogs.

 

The ill-treatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib has been condemned by the Bush Administration and the Pentagon. The commander of the prison, Brigadier-General Janice Karpinski, has been replaced and 17 soldiers have been suspended, with six facing courts martial for their behavior. On May 19, 2004, Army Specialist Jeremy Sivits plead guilty to charges that he helped abuse Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib. He received one year in prison, a demotion in rank and a dishonorable discharge for his cooperation.

 

At least one of the soldiers facing a court martial told the press that he would plead not guilty, and said that he had frequently asked for guidelines and training from the chain of command but all his requests went unanswered. The new commander, Major General Geoffrey D. Miller, who formally oversaw Camp Delta in Guantanamo Bay, reports that a training program has been instituted to train soldiers working in the prison in Geneva Convention rules regarding the treatment of prisoners of war.

Congress continues to hold hearings on the reported abuses, the first of which Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testified before the Armed Services Committee in the House and Senate. Warning that there were more photos of abuse and torture in Abu Ghraib prison, Rumsfeld said, "First, beyond abuse of prisoners, there are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence toward prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.  Second, there are many more photographs, and indeed some videos. Congress and the American people and the rest of the world need to know this.  In addition, the photos give these incidents a vividness, indeed a horror, in the eyes of the world." The Administration is currently grappling with the issue of if, when and how these photos and videos should be released.

Amnesty International remains concerned about the treatment of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, and other unknown locations around the world. Some of the detainees released from detention centers report torture and ill treatment while being detained in Afghanistan, Guantanamo, and Iraq. Amnesty International brought allegations of torture and ill-treatment to the Bush Administration regarding detainees in Afghanistan and Guantanamo in early January 2002, and in May of 2003 in Iraq. In January of 2002, AI Secretary General Irene Khan wrote to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld expressing concerns of the treatment of prisoners held in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay and requested access to the facilities. In April of 2002, AI Secretary General sent a four-page letter and 61 page memorandum to President Bush regarding the rights and status of detainees in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. In February 2003, Amnesty International representatives along with other human rights organizations met with Department of Defense General Counsel William Haynes to express concern about allegations of torture and ill treatment of detainees in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay and inquire into the plan for treatment of prisoners of war in the impending Iraq war. Haynes offered no information. In May of 2003 Amnesty International publicized the first cases of ill-treatment of Iraqi detainees and raises the issue with local US military personnel. In July 2003, Amnesty International released its "Memorandum of Concerns" detailing cases of ill treatment in Iraq and the content of discussions held with top-level CPA authorities. These are just some of the numerous actions that Amnesty International has taken to raise their concerns with US authorities. Despite raising these concerns repeatedly and continuing to request access to all detention facilities, Amnesty International has not received an answer nor has it been granted access to any detention facility.

 

In an open letter to President Bush on May 7, 2004, Amnesty International stated that "The Fourth Geneva Convention (Article 147, Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949) lists ‘torture or inhuman treatment, without distinguishing among the two in terms of gravity, among their ‘grave breaches'. These are war crimes and are the most serious offences that every High Contracting Party to the Conventions must prevent and suppress, including by prosecuting the perpetrators."

 

Amnesty International recommends that the United States Government:

-         Allow a full, independent, and transparent investigations into the allegations at Abu Ghraib prison, Iraq, and other detention facilities to establish whether war crimes have been committed and ensure accountability at the highest level;

-         Bring to justice those responsible for war crimes and other violations in accordance with the USA's obligations under international and US law;

-         Prohibit incommunicado detention to diminish the chances of torture, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment;

-         Grant full access to all detention centers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and elsewhere, not only to the International Committee of the Red Cross but also to independent human rights groups capable of making the information public;

-         Ensure, through appropriate policies, training and oversight, that torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment will not be tolerated. All detainees in US custody must be treated humanely and in accordance with US obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law;

-         Prohibit all techniques during interrogations which violate the prohibition against torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. These include such techniques as holding detainees naked, making them assume painful positions, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold, and hooding;

-         Ensure that private contractors uphold US and international law, and that they receive adequate training on human rights practices and protections.

 

 

To read the July 2003, Memorandum on Concerns Relating to Law and Order in Iraq that AI sent to the US government and the CPA, go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/iraq/document.do?id=BF50F71E2237AD3880256D6700470B66

To read the April 2002 Memorandum to the US Government on the rights of people in US custody in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay that AI sent to the US government, go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/document.do?id=CBE2E70538D9197B80256B91003B5208

    To read Amnesty International's new report "Killings of civilians in Basra and al-'Amara," go to:

    http://www.amnestyusa.org/iraq/basraalamara.html

   

To read Amnesty International's "An open letter to President George W. Bush on the question of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=BFC435C393015C2785256E8D00540F48

To read Amnesty International's packet, Denounce Torture in Iraq, and take the most recent actions on this issue, go to: http://www.amnestyusa.org/iraq/iraq_index.html

 

 

 

Take Action Now: Resources and Activities for Members

 

Amnesty International is the world's largest grassroots human rights organization with over 1.5 million members. Your voice matters. Let your community and government leaders know you care when human rights are denied and that you demand respect for the rights of all. Listed below are actions and resources including educational materials and individual casework. Just click on the web link to send a letter to a government official, view information about how to organize in your community, or read the latest Amnesty International reports and other resources. For more information, you can contact Ms. Jumana Musa, Advocacy Director for Domestic Human Rights and International Justice in the Government Relations program, at 202-544-0200, or send an email to wot@aiusa.org.

 

Take Action Now: AIUSA Online Actions

 

Express your concern about private contractors operating in Iraqi prisons:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10897

 

Call for independent investigations into abuses in Iraqi detention facilities:

 

Express your concern about the status of detainees in Guantanamo Bay:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10552

 

Urge to US government to fully investigate the deportation and torture of Maher Arar:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10568

 

 

Express your concern about the continuing detention of Ahmad Abu Ali:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10860

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10859

 

Protect Human Rights and Civil Liberties - Oppose the CLEAR Act:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10419

 

Stop Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement – Support the End Racial Profiling Act:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10626

 

Rein in the USA PATRIOT Act – Support the SAFE Act:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10554

 

Support the Durbin Torture Amendment:

Email/Fax: http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=10902

Text of the amendment:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/actioncenter/files/durbin_torture_amendment.pdf

 

 

 

Websites for Background Information and AIUSA Toolkits for Action

 

The "War in Terror" - http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/

Contains summaries of AIUSA's numerous human rights concerns about the "war on terror" including torture, discrimination, civil rights and refugee issues with various links to informational documents and actions.

 

Torture Must Not be Tolerated in Iraq - http://www.amnestyusa.org/iraq/iraq_index.html

Read recent AI reports on human rights in Iraq, AI's open letter to President Bush, and ask call for independent investigations into reported abuse at Iraqi detention facilities.

 

End Racial Profiling - http://www.amnestyusa.org/racial_profiling/

Contains information on the practice of racial profiling and actions to take in your community, as well as information about current legislation.

 

USA PATRIOT Act - http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/patriotact/

Contains information about the PATRIOT Act, links to a PATRIOT Act Tool Kit to take actions at your school and in your community, and links to actions for legislation.

 

PATRIOT Toolkit - http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/patriotact/groups.html

Contains links to documents that assist in organizing to protect civil liberties and human rights, such as asking Congress to amend portions of the PATRIOT Act, holding community forums, and passing a resolution protecting your rights in your community or at your school.

 

Domestic US Human Rights - http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/index.do

Link to the USA web page containing articles, reports, and actions supported by AIUSA's Domestic US Program regarding the state of human rights in the USA. To contact the USA program or to be placed on their activist e-mail list, you can e-mail them at usa@aiusa.org.

 

Guantanamo Bay Detainees - http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/guantanamo/

Links to AIUSA's resource page on the detainees in Guantanamo, including recent reports and actions.

 

Detainees in the US and Abroad - http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp

The Center for Constitutional Rights has been responsible for litigating a number of cases regarding the detention of people in the US and abroad due to the "war on terror." Many of the cases are reported and updated on their website.

 

Recent AIUSA Reports

 

Iraq: Killing of Civilians in Basra and al -‘Amara (May 2004) http://www.amnestyusa.org/iraq/basraalamara.html

United States of America – Undermining Security: Violations of Human Dignity, the Rule of Law and the National Security Strategy in "War on Terror" Detentions (April 2004) http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510612004?open&of=ENG-USA

Despite Releases, Guantanamo Remains an Affront to the Rule of Law http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/document.do?id=522C235AB4A0412A80256E4700580DCB

United States of America: Holding Human Rights Hostage (December 2003): http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511642003?open&of=ENG-USA

United State of America, The threat of a bad example - Undermining international standards as "war on terror" detentions continue (August 2003): http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511142003?open&of=ENG-USA

Rights at Risk (January 2002): http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/rightsatrisk.pdf

 

Amnesty International's Concerns Regarding Post September 11 Detentions in the USA (March 2002): http://www.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/9.11.detentions2.pdf

 

 

Upcoming Reports, Resources, and Actions

 

World Day of Solidarity with Victims of Torture – June 26 is a day of solidarity with torture victims. AIUSA will have a packet online that includes information and actions to take including community forums, teach-ins, and demonstrations focusing on the torture of detainees held in the name of the "war on terror."

 

Civil Liberties Restoration Act – This bill will be introduced in Congress soon and will address the aspects of the PTARIOT Act and other laws that have impacted non citizens in the United States, including provisions that allow for blanket denial of bond to immigration detainees and prolonged detention. More information and an action will be posted online.

 

Detainee Action Packet - Amnesty International has expressed many concerns about the manner in which thousands of people have been detained, mistreated, held indefinitely, and denied basic due process rights in the name of the "war on terror." This packet, which was introduced at the AGM, gives background on US and international law and also provides information and actions to take on detainees being held around the world and will be online soon.

 

Rights for All: Post 11 September Project on the Gulf - This project will cover detention in the name of security and "fighting terrorism" of both Gulf nationals detained in Guantanamo Bay and in the Gulf sub-region. This action follows a seminar in Sana'a, Yemen, where activists, lawyers, and journalists gathered to highlight their concerns in April. The "Sana'a Appeal", urging the countries concerned to respect and protect the rights of detainees was the first action, made public after the seminar. A new report will follow soon.

 

Racial Profiling – In 2003, the USA human rights program traveled the country, holding a series of racial profiling hearings. AIUSA gathered direct testimony from different communities across the country detailing instances of racial profiling. In September, AIUSA will publish a report summarizing much of the testimony. The report will be used to promote the passage of the End Racial Profiling Act.

 

USA PATRIOT Act – Over the summer, AIUSA will be updating the PATRIOT Act toolkit for members to continue taking action on US legislation relating the "war on terror."