Originally published on the CGS blog on December 18, 2014.
The Senate Intelligence Committee recently released a much-anticipated executive summary of a more than 6,000-page report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s tactics in questioning detainees in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks.
The report documents in detail the inhumane “enhanced interrogation techniques” used by the CIA at various facilities around the world. The techniques included the use of insects, rectal feeding and rehydrating, sleep deprivation, prolonged standing, and threats to family.
Findings indicate that interrogators frequently went beyond the limits outlined by the Department of Justice, subjecting detainees to extremely aggressive tactics that often proved fruitless.
The report details the interrogation of at least 39 detainees, focusing specifically on one detainee, Abu Zubaydah. In the case of Zubaydah, waterboarding was more regular and more extreme than previously reported. During one session, he lost consciousness and water and air bubbles began to come out of his mouth.
The US is now coming under scrutiny of many international organizations and countries, including the UN. The UN special Rapporteur on human rights, Ben Emmerson, has called on the US to hold senior officials accountable, stating that there is an international obligation to re-open inquiries into alleged breaches of human rights.
What Emmerson is referring to is the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). CAT is one of nine international human rights treaties aimed at securing the rights of the world’s citizens, which the US co-authored and signed onto in 1988, eventually ratifying in 1994.
While CAT gives the US the opportunity act as an example for other countries and hold itself accountable for what President Obama has called a “mistake,” this is unlikely to happen. The US ratified CAT with significant reservations, leaving some accountability to be desired.
Several reservations are worth noting in aftermath of the Committee report. First, the definition of torture has been left open to interpretation. While the definition of torture in CAT seems only to require general intent to inflict severe physical and mental pain and suffering, the US reservation understands this intent to be specific.
Specific intent to inflict severe physical and mental pain and suffering will be difficult to prove, and US the report stops short of qualifying torture in any of the circumstances outlined. This likely will make it difficult to bring charges against those involved.
Additionally, the US declared that CAT is not self-executing, meaning that it cannot implemented without national legislation. Luckily, the US has a legal instrument in place: the 2009 Federal anti-torture statute, enacted as an Executive Order, which could function as a pathway to accountability.
The US cannot continue to call for international action on human rights violations while failing to hold itself to those same standards. We must urge the US to remain a champion of human rights, both at home and abroad, and that includes taking substantive action when human rights violations are uncovered.
