It was an interesting and disappointing week for those
of us who want to see some accountability for the Bush administration’s
torture policies.
It had started on a positive note, with the news that prosecutors
in Spain would likely issue indictments against Alberto Gonzales and
five other high-ranking Bush administration officials for sanctioning
the torture of terror suspects.
The hope for justice that came with that news quickly turned to disappointment,
however, when Spain’s attorney general ultimately rejected the
move. AG Candido Conde-Pumpido said the case had “no merit”
since no members of Bush’s torture team were present when the
alleged abuses took place.
Meanwhile, back here in the U.S., the Obama administration took a
step forward towards transparency and open government by releasing
four of the Bush administration’s secret memos that had been
used to justify torture.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
At the same time, however, Obama managed to disappoint when he announced
that his administration would not prosecute the CIA operatives who
engaged in torture. The reason, according to U.S. Attorney General
Eric Holder, is that it “would be unfair to prosecute dedicated
men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned
in advance by the Justice Department.” In other words, they
were just following orders. They were playing by the rules, however
misguided those rules might have been.
So here we have it:
So which approach is correct? In my opinion, neither.
All of them -- all those who sanctioned the torture and all those
who carried it out -- are responsible for the torture that has violated
U.S. and international law and severely damaged our reputation in
the world.
The Justice Department officials who stretched the law in order to
justify the unjustifiable are to blame and should be held accountable.
They knew that they had stretched it too far. In a 40-page memo dated
May 30, 2005, Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury actually
admitted that they “cannot predict with confidence whether a
Court would agree with our conclusions.”
The CIA operatives and any others who participated in the torture
are also to blame and should be held accountable. The excuse that
they were “just following orders” doesn’t cut it.
If your boss ordered you to rob a bank, would you do it?
The CIA knew that the methods they were using were wrong. (Remember
all those evidentiary tapes that they destroyed?)
Still, Obama wants to let them off the hook, saying that “nothing
will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the
past.”
Then why do we bother to have laws at all, Mr. President, if you
believe that “nothing will be gained by spending our time and
energy laying blame” for certain crimes?
As ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero noted, “We can’t
just say ‘Tsk. Tsk. That should never have happened’ and
walk away. We must demonstrate our commitment to the rule of law and
demand accountability if our country is going to move forward.”
Torture isn’t a little white lie or an unkept campaign promise.
Torture is a serious crime under U.S. and international law. The use
of torture violates the U.S. Constitution, Amendment 8; the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, Article 5; the Third Geneva Convention;
the UN Torture Convention; and more.
Therefore, the U.S. is legally obligated to bring those suspected
of torture to trial.
Instead, by granting immunity to the torturers, the Obama administration
is essentially protecting war criminals.
This is no way to repair our reputation in the world.
And this is no way to lead.
America is not above the law.
