VDC: A Statement From the Family of Lawyer and Human Rights Activist Razan Zeitouneh
[scribd id=217149698 key=key-azvr70wcxvulprte723 mode=scroll]
Senate Panel Votes To Release CIA Torture Report
By: Brandon R. Cottrell
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America
WASHINGTON, D.C., United States – The Senate Intelligence Committee voted last week to release parts of a four year long report that investigated CIA terror interrogations during the Bush administration.
The panel, which is comprised of fourteen members, had eleven members voting in favor of release and three members (Republican Senators Marco Rubio of Florida, Dan Coats of Indiana and Jim Risch of Idaho) voting against release of five hundred pages (out of six thousand total pages) of the report.
Though the report needs to be declassified, the release should still provide the fullest account of the enhanced interrogation techniques that were used. According to members of the intelligence community, however, the report will not paint a full picture as the underlying investigation “fail[ed] to include interviews from top spy agency officials who authorized or supervised the brutal interrogations.”
Senator Richard Burr, who voted in favor of releasing the report, believes that the report is “flawed and biased” but thought it important “to give the American people the opportunity to make their judgments.”
Amid concerns that the CIA will “sanitize key elements of their investigation” as they redact passages that could comprise national security, the White House reported that it would instruct intelligence officials to cooperate fully with the pending release.
Additionally, Dean Boyd, a CIA spokesman, said that the agency would “carry out the review expeditiously” and that “we owe it to the men and women directed to carry out this program to try and ensure that any historical account is accurate.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, stated that “”The purpose of this review was to uncover the facts behind the secret program and the results, I think, were shocking . . . the report exposes brutality that stands in sharp contrast to our values as a nation [and] it chronicles a stain on our history that must never be allowed to happen again. This is not what Americans do.” Feinstein has additionally stated that she hopes the report will be released to the public within thirty days.
Amnesty International issued a statement with similar sentiments, stating that “the interrogation techniques amount to torture and therefore violated international law” and that it wished the report would be released in full but acknowledged that “given the systematic failure of the U.S. authorities to declassify and disclose anything like the full truth . . . any transparency on them is a step in the right direction.”
The report accuses the CIA of overstating the significance of alleged terrorist plots and prisoners, and exaggerating the effectiveness of the program by claiming credit for information surrendered before they were subjected to the interrogations.
For further information, please see the following:
AP – Senate Panel Votes To Release CIA Torture Report – 3/April/14
New York Times – Senate Panel Votes To Reveal Report On C.I.A. Interrogations – 3/April/14
USA Today – Senate Panel Votes To Declassify Part Of CIA Report – 3/April/14
Washington Post – Senate Panel Votes To Release CIA Interrogation Report – 3/April/14
Civil Suit Opened against Dutch State by Srebrenica Survivors
By Ben Kopp
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe
THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Survivors of the 1995 Srebrenica massacre filed suit against the Dutch government, arguing that Dutch peacekeepers should have prevented the bloodshed.
On 11 July 1995, Bosnian Serb forces overran the town of Srebrenica, a UN-protected safe haven for Muslims. General Ratko Mladic’s troops moved by lightly-armed Dutch peacekeepers in the safe area, where thousands of Muslims gathered for protection. As days followed, nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered and their bodies dumped in mass graves. The event has been called the worst bloodshed on European soil since World War II.
Mladic, dubbed the Butcher of Bosnia, and former Bosnian Serb political chief Radovan Karadzic are facing charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Hague.
In 2007, a victims’ group, the Mothers of Srebrenica brought suit in connection with the massacre. The Mothers of Srebrenica represents about 6,000 widows and victims’ relatives. They have been seeking justice for several years for the massacre, which the UN’s International Court of Justice has ruled genocide.
“They did not prevent the murder of thousands of civilians,” the group’s lawyer Marco Gerritsen told the Hague court, where the case is being heard.
“The Mothers of Srebrenica want the responsibility of the Dutch to be recognised and then compensation, even though this is less important to them,” said Semir Guzin, another victims’ lawyer.
“Of course, this procedure is not going to give us our sons and husbands back, but will bring a bit of justice,” Hatidza Mehmedovic, one of about a dozen representatives of the Mothers present at the hearing.
In 2013, the European Court for Human Rights ruled against the Mothers of Srebrenica, stating that the United Nations had immunity.
However, in September 2013, the Dutch Supreme Court ordered the government to pay damages to victims’ relatives. Those victims had been handed over to Bosnian Serb forces by Dutch soldiers. More recently, the Dutch state’s lawyer argued that the Netherlands had no direct control over the Dutch peacekeeping unit during the operation. Civil proceedings against the Dutch state had been put on hold pending the outcome of the case against the UN.
“It is about Dutch soldiers, but Dutch soldiers wearing blue helmets and therefore completely under UN control,” Gert-Jan Houtzagers told the court. “Dutchbat did what it could with a handful of men. They tried to protect as many refugees as possible. That didn’t work, but it’s twisting the facts to say they [Dutchbat] led people like lambs to the slaughter.”
For further information, please see:
Al Jazeera – Srebrenica Survivors Sue Dutch Government – April 7, 2014
Deutsche Welle – Srebrenica Relatives Sue Dutch Government – April 7, 2014
Guardian – Srebrenica Massacre Survivors Take Legal Action against Dutch Government – April 7, 2014
Washington Post – Srebrenica Widows Sue Dutch Government – April 7, 2014
The situation in Syria – Gérard Araud (France), David M. Crane (SCSL) and Dr. Stuart J. Hamilton – Press conference
District Court Judge Dismisses Suit Over Drone Strike Deaths
by Michael Yoakum
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America
WASHINGTON, D.C., United States – A federal judge dismissed an action against top Obama administration officials Friday brought by family members of three American citizens killed in a drone strike in Yemen, including Anwar al-Awlaki. While D.C. district court Judge Rosemary Collyer said the case “raises fundamental issues regarding constitutional principles,” she announced that she will grant the government’s motion to dismiss.
The ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights represented the families of the three men killed in the drone strikes: al-Awlaki, his son Abdulrahman, and Samir Khan, a naturalized citizen who moved to Yemen in 2009 to work for an English language magazine. The suit named former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Patraeus, and two commanders in the military’s Special Operations Command.
Judge Collyer, in her 41 page opinion, ruled that courts should hesitate to hold government officials personally liable for violating citizens’ constitutional rights during wartime.
“The persons holding the jobs of the named defendants must be trusted and expected to act in accordance with the U.S. Constitution when they intentionally target a U.S. citizen abroad at the direction of the president and with the concurrence of Congress,” Collyer wrote, adding “They cannot be held personally responsible in monetary damages for conducting war.”
The ruling, if it stands, suggests that the Judiciary has no role in evaluating the legality of the Executive’s decision to kill American citizens in overseas operations when officials have deemed those citizens to be terrorists.
Brian Fallen, a Department of Justice spokesman, stated that the district court reached the correct decision. Lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights say they have not decided whether they will appeal the decision.
Lawyers from the ACLU were vocal about their distaste for the court’s ruling. “This is a deeply troubling decision that treats the government’s allegations as proof while refusing to allow those allegations to be tested in court,” ACLU lawyer Hina Shamsi said.
The Obama administration is separately fighting Freedom of Information Act requests brought by the New York Times and ACLU seeking disclosure of a memo authored by the Department of Justice laying out the legal justification for the strikes. Presently a summary of that legal reasoning has been unclassified and made available to the public.
For more information, please see:
Associated Press – Judge dismisses lawsuit over drone strikes – 4 April 2014
The Guardian – Drone killings case thrown out in US – 4 April 2014
The New York Times – Judge Dismisses Suit Against Administration Officials Over Drone Strikes – 4 April 2014
Reuters – Lawsuit over American drone strikes dismissed by U.S. judge – 4 April 2014
The Washington Post – Judge dismisses lawsuit over drone strikes in Yemen that killed American Anwar al-Awlaki – 4 April 2014