[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 147 (Tuesday, November 8, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12520-S12521]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ABUSE OF FOREIGN DETAINEES
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President. The Bush administration has steadfastly
refused to address the black mark on our Nation caused by its
interrogation policies and practices and the resulting abuse of
detainees. Some of us in Congress strongly believe that oversight and
accountability are paramount to restoring America's reputation as a
human rights leader. We have been stymied in our efforts to learn the
truth about how this administration's policies trickled down from
offices in Washington to cellblocks in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and
Afghanistan.
The administration's effort, led by Vice President Cheney, to block
any legislation that would regulate the treatment of detainees is
wrong. Also wrong is the Bush administration's refusal to consider an
independent commission to investigate the abuses. It would rather rely
on internal, piecemeal investigations conducted within the Defense
Department, none of which address the significant role of the Central
Intelligence Agency in interrogations.
Given the failure of the Republican-controlled Congress to conduct
effective oversight, I support the Levin amendment to the Defense
authorization bill to establish an independent commission on the
treatment of detainees in U.S. custody. I have spoken many times about
the need for a comprehensive, independent investigation into the abuse
of detainees. Such an investigation may not be without painful, but
accountability is a necessary step if we are to recover from all that
has transpired during this administration's watch.
I am not alone in calling for an independent commission. Several
organizations, including the American Bar Association, Human Rights
First, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch, have urged the
creation of an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate the
prisoner abuses. A letter from eight retired generals and admirals to
President Bush asked him to appoint a prisoner abuse commission modeled
on the 9/11 Commission. In that letter, the flag officers stated,
``internal investigations by their nature suffer from a critical lack
of independence. Americans have never thought it wise or fair for one
branch of government to police itself.''
The 9/11 Commission provides more than a structural model for a new
commission; it also provides a lesson in how perseverance can overcome
the Bush administration's inclination to secrecy and to refuse to
acknowledge the facts. The Bush administration initially opposed the
formation of the 9/11 Commission, just as it now opposes a prisoner
abuse commission. The administration used the same argument against
both commissions. It asserts that its own internal investigations are
sufficient.
Ironically, Dr. James Schlesinger, the head of a panel established by
Secretary Rumsfeld to investigate the prisoner abuses, addressed this
issue in his testimony to the Senate Government Affairs Committee in
February 2002, as it debated the need for the 9/11 Commission. He
argued for the creation of the 9/11 Commission because ``to this point
many questions have been addressed piecemeal or not at all. The purpose
of the National Commission would be systematically and comprehensively
to address such questions and to give a complete accounting of the
events leading up to 9/11. In my judgment, such a Commission would
serve a high, indeed indispensable, national purpose.'' This is exactly
the same reason we need an independent commission to investigate the
prisoner abuse scandals.
Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. Delaying the
accounting will not solve the problems. Each week brings new
allegations that reveal how much we still do not know. Human rights
groups and journalists are doing what they can to bring the truth to
light. It is past time for Congress to hold a thorough, oversight
investigation. The least Congress should finally do is establish an
independent commission to investigate these matters. Rather than wait
to read about the latest discovery of abuse in tomorrow's paper, let us
at least do that.
After months of delay from the Republican Senate leadership, the
Senate finally had an opportunity last month to vote on clear guidance
for treatment of detainees in U.S. custody. When we did, the Senate
voted overwhelmingly, 90 to 9, in favor of Senator McCain's amendment
to the Defense appropriations bill, which I was glad to cosponsor along
with Senator Durbin and others.
That same amendment was adopted a second time to the Defense
Authorization bill and I, again, cosponsored it.
Our credibility and reputation as a world leader in human rights has
suffered greatly during the last few years. The scandals have put our
own troops at risk and undermined their efforts in Afghanistan and
Iraq.
Many of us have been working on these issues for years. I first wrote
to Condoleezza Rice in 2003, after reports of deaths of detainees were
reported from the Bagram base in Afghanistan in late 2002. Like so much
we have learned, those first reports came from the press and human
rights groups, not the Bush administration.
The Bush administration has threatened to veto any legislation that
would regulate the treatment of detainees. Vice President Cheney is
reported to be personally lobbying on this matter.
A group of 28 senior military officers, including GEN John
Shalikashvili, recently wrote to Senator McCain in support of his
amendments addressing detainee treatment. That letter states:
The abuse of prisoners hurts America's cause in the war on
terror, endangers U.S. service members who might be captured
by the enemy, and is anathema to the values
[[Page S12521]]
Americans have held dear for generations. . . . Our service
members were denied clear guidance, and left to take the
blame when things went wrong. They deserve better than that.
I hope the President will consider these words before he vetoes a
bill that contains our amendment.
Prisoner abuse by U.S. personnel is deeply troubling. It is one
aspect of a broader problem. While we must ensure that prisoners are
treated humanely by our own personnel, we must also prohibit the use of
so-called extraordinary renditions to send people to other countries
where they will be subject to torture.
The Bush administration says that it does not condone torture, but
transferring detainees to other countries where they will be tortured
does not absolve our Government of responsibility. By outsourcing
torture to these countries, we diminish our own values as a nation and
lose our credibility as an advocate of human rights around the world.
We have addressed this issue before. Congress implemented article 3
of the Convention Against Torture in the Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998, but this administration has exploited
loopholes in that law to transfer detainees to countries where they are
subjected to torture. Attorney General Gonzales recently said that U.S.
policy is not to send detainees ``to countries where we believe or we
know that they're going to be tortured,'' but he acknowledged that we
``can't fully control'' what other nations do, and added that he does
not know whether countries have always complied with their promises. In
fact, they have not.
I introduced legislation in March to close the loophole and to
prevent extraordinary renditions. Now that Congress is finally willing
to regulate the treatment of detainees--a power that is expressly
granted in the Constitution--I hope that the Senate will support my
legislation to prohibit renditions.
____________________