European governments knew about the unlawful rendition of terrorist suspects
Jun 8th 2006
IN JANUARY the Council of Europe, an inter-governmental human rights organisation, released an interim report on “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects in Europe. Dick Marty, a Swiss senator leading the investigation, claimed to have unearthed “coherent, convergent evidence...of a system of 'relocation' of torture by American agents.” He added that it was “highly unlikely” that European governments—or at least their intelligence services—were unaware that more than 100 people had been unlawfully “rendered”, or abducted, to third countries. “If governments resort to gangster-style methods, I say no!” he thundered.
In this week's final report, Mr Marty not only confirms his claim, but also asserts that at least seven European governments were complicit. Furthermore, he notes what he calls “coherent and converging elements” that point to the existence of secret interrogation and detention centres in Europe, notably in Romania and Poland. (The governments of these two countries vigorously deny this charge.)
Mr Marty's first report, based largely on press and allegations, was widely dismissed as an anti-American exercise. This time, his evidence is stronger, his sources more authoritative, and his tone more measured. He admits that “it would be exaggerated to talk of thousands of [CIA] flights, let alone hundreds of renditions” involving Europe. He fails to provide more than a strong presumption of the existence of secret detention centres. And he drops his earlier charge of a deliberate “outsourcing” of torture.
The Americans never denied their use of renditions. Indeed, the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, has said that the transport of captured terrorist suspects to third countries “where they can be questioned, held or brought to justice”, has been practised by the United States—and other countries—for decades. She insists that this is all perfectly lawful. As John Bellinger, her chief legal adviser, put it to Mr Marty: “The United States does not do extraordinary renditions...[it] does not render people to other countries for the purpose of being tortured, or in the expectation that they will be tortured.”
Mr Marty contends that the original rendition programme has now changed. Since September 11th 2001, captured terrorist suspects have been detained indefinitely, beyond the reach of any judicial system and without any human-rights protections, he says. This, according to the UN high commissioner for human rights, is tantamount to torture. Mr Marty's research uncovered ten cases of “unlawful interstate transfers” in Europe, involving 17 detainees, including some who claimed to have been tortured.
“It is now clear”, Mr Marty says, “that authorities in several European countries actively participated with the CIA in these unlawful activities. Other countries ignored them knowingly, or did not want to know.” He lists seven of the Council of Europe's 46 members who could be held responsible, in varying degrees, for violations of the rights of named individuals: Britain, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Bosnia, Macedonia and Turkey. Several more colluded, actively or passively, in the detention or transfer of suspects. And most governments “did not seem particularly eager to establish the alleged facts.”
Jun 8th 2006
IN JANUARY the Council of Europe, an inter-governmental human rights organisation, released an interim report on “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects in Europe. Dick Marty, a Swiss senator leading the investigation, claimed to have unearthed “coherent, convergent evidence...of a system of 'relocation' of torture by American agents.” He added that it was “highly unlikely” that European governments—or at least their intelligence services—were unaware that more than 100 people had been unlawfully “rendered”, or abducted, to third countries. “If governments resort to gangster-style methods, I say no!” he thundered.
In this week's final report, Mr Marty not only confirms his claim, but also asserts that at least seven European governments were complicit. Furthermore, he notes what he calls “coherent and converging elements” that point to the existence of secret interrogation and detention centres in Europe, notably in Romania and Poland. (The governments of these two countries vigorously deny this charge.)
Mr Marty's first report, based largely on press and allegations, was widely dismissed as an anti-American exercise. This time, his evidence is stronger, his sources more authoritative, and his tone more measured. He admits that “it would be exaggerated to talk of thousands of [CIA] flights, let alone hundreds of renditions” involving Europe. He fails to provide more than a strong presumption of the existence of secret detention centres. And he drops his earlier charge of a deliberate “outsourcing” of torture.
The Americans never denied their use of renditions. Indeed, the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, has said that the transport of captured terrorist suspects to third countries “where they can be questioned, held or brought to justice”, has been practised by the United States—and other countries—for decades. She insists that this is all perfectly lawful. As John Bellinger, her chief legal adviser, put it to Mr Marty: “The United States does not do extraordinary renditions...[it] does not render people to other countries for the purpose of being tortured, or in the expectation that they will be tortured.”
Mr Marty contends that the original rendition programme has now changed. Since September 11th 2001, captured terrorist suspects have been detained indefinitely, beyond the reach of any judicial system and without any human-rights protections, he says. This, according to the UN high commissioner for human rights, is tantamount to torture. Mr Marty's research uncovered ten cases of “unlawful interstate transfers” in Europe, involving 17 detainees, including some who claimed to have been tortured.
“It is now clear”, Mr Marty says, “that authorities in several European countries actively participated with the CIA in these unlawful activities. Other countries ignored them knowingly, or did not want to know.” He lists seven of the Council of Europe's 46 members who could be held responsible, in varying degrees, for violations of the rights of named individuals: Britain, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Bosnia, Macedonia and Turkey. Several more colluded, actively or passively, in the detention or transfer of suspects. And most governments “did not seem particularly eager to establish the alleged facts.”
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق