By Ali Sprott-Roen
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

JUAREZ, Mexico – In the second death of a Mexican citizen at the hands of an American border patrol agent in two weeks, 15-year-old Adrian Hernandez Huereka of Juarez was shot in the head and killed on June 7^th. He was believed to be throwing big rocks at the Border Patrol agents who were trying to detain illegal immigrants.

The boy’s body was found on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande, while the Border Patrol agent, who was on bicycle patrol, was on the U.S. side. U.S. authorities claim that the agent was defending himself and fellow agents, however Mexican President, Felipe Calderon, has condemned the death and the Mexican Secretary of the state has stated that using a firearm to respond to a rock attack is a “disproportionate use of force.”

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman, Border Patrol agents are allowed to use lethal force “when an agent is in imminent threat of physical or bodily harm, which could cause death or injury or in protection of an innocent third party.”

The Border Patrol agent who shot Huereka claims he was surrounded by suspected illegal immigrants who were assaulting him with rocks, but a video obtained by CNN has casts doubts on this report. The video shows the border agent emerging on his bicycle from underneath a railroad bridge linking the U.S. and Mexico,  then detaining one individual who he drags along the concrete before raising his arm, with what appears to be a firearm in hand, moments before two shots are heard fired. Witnesses on the video can be heard saying in Spanish, “they’re throwing rocks,” as well as “they hit him…they hit him.”

The boy’s body was found approximately 20 feet over the border on the Mexican side. It is believed he was shot at close range due to the presence of spent .40 caliber shell casings found near his body, suggesting that the U.S. agent crossed the border to shoot the boy.  Border Patrol agent rules mandate that agents from both countries remain on their respective sides of the border.

The Mexican Foreign Ministry responded to the event by saying that “The growing frequency of this type of event reflects a worrisome increment in the use of excessive force on the part of some border authorities.”

According to the Ministry’s data the number of Mexicans killed or wounded by U.S. border Patrol agents has increased from five in 2008 to 12 in 2009 and 17 so far this year.

For more information, please see:

CBS – U.S. Border Patrol Fatally Shoots Mexican Teen, Incites Anger, Calls for Investigation – 9 June 2010

Silver City Sun-News – Border Patrol agent shoots teen – 8 June 2010

Huffington Post – Border Patrol Agent Shots 15-Year-Old Boy at Bridge – 8 June 2010

CNN – Youth fatally shot by border agent had smuggling ties, officials say – 10 June 2010

Huffington Post – Border Patrol Shooting Video: Footage Emerges Of Moments Before Teenager Was Shot – 10 June 2010

By Ali Sprott-Roen
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MASSACHUSETTS, United States – A just-released report from Physicians for Human Rights alleges that Bush-era CIA medical personnel conducted human research and experimentation on detainees in an attempt to provide legal cover for torture and to refine future torture techniques.  This created the unintended consequence of placing the medical professionals involved in legal and ethical jeopardy.

There are domestic and international laws limiting human research and experimentation, based on both the post-World War II Nuremberg Code and American Common Rule, which ban experimentation on humans without informed consent.

“In an attempt to justify the war crime of torture, the CIA appears to have committed another alleged war crime — illegal experimentation on prisoners,” says Nathaniel Raymond, director of the PHR’s Campaign Against Torture and lead author of the report.

Allegedly illegal and unethical human research was conducted by medical staff in three ways, according to the report. First, they monitored and collected data on waterboarding. This lead to modifications of the procedure that resulted in “waterboarding 2.0,” which added saline to the water to avoid rendering detainees comatose or dead.  Second, they studied interrogation techniques to determine the most effective tactics, whether in combination or over time, based on the susceptibility of the subject to severe pain. Third, they conducted sleep deprivation experiments, for up to 180 hours, in order to collect data to support future policies.  The goal of this research and experimentation was to develop interrogation methods that remained within the limits established by government lawyers, while producing the maximum effect of the torture.

“There was no therapeutic purpose or intent to monitor and collect this data,” said Jonathan D. Moreno,  professor of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania.  Consequently, according to the report, medical professionals crossed the line from treating the detainees as patients to treating them as research subjects.

These conclusions were based on an analysis by Physicians for Human Rights of publicly released government documents and reports regarding the CIAs interrogation program, including previously classified documents released by President Obama between May 2009 and February 2010.

However, despite evidence of human experimentation and research, the government has not investigated any of the medical professionals involved in the interrogations.

According to Dr. Steven H. Miles, an expert on the role of medical professionals in torture, “There are countries that, over the years, have condemned medical complicity in torture in principle, but which haven’t really been willing to investigate medical professionals or hold them accountable,”  and that includes the United States.

The CIA denies any wrongdoing, but Physicians for Human Rights is calling on President Obama to initiate a criminal investigation into the allegations and all agencies involved, and to prosecute the responsible parties if a crime is found. In addition, there is a strong demand for Congress to repeal changes made to the War Crimes Act in 2006 which allow for a more lenient definition of illegal experimentation on detainees.

Physicians for Human Rights seeks redress for past wrongdoing and prevention of future interrogation  experimentation and research tactics, which  its CEO, Frank Donaghue, calls “gross violations of humans rights law” and “a grave affront to America’s core values.”

For more information, please see:

Salon.com – PHR report: CIA personnel engaged in human experimentation – 7 June 2010

New York Times – Medical Ethics Lapses Cited in Interrogations – 6 June 2010

New Haven Register – Bush administration conducted torture research on detainees, report claims – 7 June 2010

HeraldSun – Doctors helped CIA perfect ‘torture” technique – 7 June 2010

NatureNews – Medics performed ‘interrogation research’ – 7 June 2010

by Erica Laster

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

KAMPALA, Uganda – The first International Criminal Court (ICC) Review Conference is now underway in Uganda. The eight day conference has sparked controversy and a flurry of lobbying of other countries by the United States in anticipation of the amendment to the Roman Statute, a discussion which will define the crime of aggression.  A division exists over whether the crime will be determined by the court or the United Nations Security Council. Uganda was among the countries courted by the United States, to seek agreement in blocking the amendment including the crime of aggression as falling under the ICC’s jurisdiction. Uganda and the U.S. have an agreement in which American nationals will not be handed over to the ICC.

The United States has come under fire in recent years regarding its policy of preemptive strike in international affairs and most recently regarding its approach to the Iraq War. The New Vision reports that Stephen J. Rapp, the United States Ambassador for War Crimes, urged the ICC review conference to tread carefully in defining the crime of aggression. Rapp cautioned that giving the ICC powers to prosecute states and individuals under such a vague term may have unintended consequences. Radio Netherlands Worldwide reports that United States delegate Elisabeth van Schaack indicated to reporters that the U.S. is concerned that the court is already overwhelmed in dealing with genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Inclusion of the crime of aggression may distract the court from other more heinous crimes.

Expanding the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court comes at a time when many countries are exercising broad discretion in invading and attacking enemies worldwide. Many of the review conference’s participants agreed that a consensus in defining the crime of aggression must be reached, speaking candidly about the issue.

Guan Jin, speaking on behalf of China as Deputy Director General of the department of Treaty and Law called for more time to discuss the amendment and negotiations rather than rush into an expansion of jurisdiction. Georgian representative Alexander Lomaya indicated the necessity of explicitly defining the crime of aggression. Kuwait authorities said that while they value the ICC’s work and efforts, they are “keen to have a reasonable definition of the crime of aggression, which is a source of concern and a threat to peace.”

Despite such opposition and concern, the European Union was the first to announce its approval for the proposed amendment to give the ICC the power to handle the crime of aggression.

For more information please see:

New Vision – US wants aggression handled by UN – 1 June 2010‎

Daily Monitor – US cautions on crime of aggression – 2 June 2010

Radio Netherlands Worldwide – ICC: crime of aggression under debate – 2 June 2010