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.
(Article continues below)
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.
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.