NEWSLETTER Volume 2, Issue 2
Preventing Torture Framing the Issue
March 2008
within the fight against terrorism Inside this issue: Yes, waterboarding is
Yes, waterboarding is torture
torture
by Bent Sørensen, IRCT Senior Medical Consultant
On 5 February, CIA director Michael Hayden admitted that during interrogation of three Al Qaeda suspects five years ago his agency had used waterboarding – a torture method whereby water is forced into the victim's lungs, inducing a powerful sense of drowning. The admission was followed by statements from other senior U.S. intelligence officials that they refused to rule out utilising this socalled “enhanced interrogation technique” in the future, while a White House spokesman said the President could authorise waterboarding in certain situations, including "belief that an attack might be imminent". On 8 March the White House confirmed its stance when President Bush vetoed a bill passed by the House and Senate, which would prohibit the CIA from utilising waterboarding and any other interrogation technique not condoned by the U.S. Army Field Manual. Preceding the admission had been a debate in the Congress during which United States AttorneyGeneral Michael Mukasey
has refused to state whether, in his view, waterboarding constitutes torture. But let us not be in doubt: waterboarding - without any reservation - can be labelled as torture, as it fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to pain, you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering – one central element in the UNCAT’s definition of torture. In addition, the CIA’s waterboarding clearly fulfils the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labelled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3)
1
Serious HR violations
by a representative of a state – in this case the U.S. Finally it should not be forgotten that the consequences of torture – including waterboarding – are often long-lasting or even chronic. For instance, anxiety attacks, depression and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are very common sequelae after torture, regardless of whether the victim is guilty or innocent. So torture is never just a momentary infliction of suffering. Waterboarding is thus a clear violation of the UNCAT, which specifies that torture is not permissible under any circumstances, including during times of emergency or threats to national security. The recent failure of the U.S. Congress to overturn the President’s veto thus represents a failure on the part of the United States to fulfil its international obligations. It is time once and for all to clearly ban waterboarding and all other forms of torture
during anti-terror campaign must be corrected—and never
2
repeated Reporting on torture in the context of the “war on terrorism”
3
Recommended reading
4
and ill-treatment, to ensure that perpetrators all along the chain of command are prosecuted and tried, and to guarantee that all victims of torture and ill-treatment by U.S. agents receive reparations, including adequate medical, physical and psychological treatment.
Bent Sørensen is a former member of the UN Committee against Torture and serves as Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims.
UPCOMING SEMINAR IN BRUSSELS, 4 APRIL:
Reporting on torture in the context of the “war on terrorism”...see page 3 for details on how to register