[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 43 (Thursday, April 6, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E548-E549]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 6, 2006

  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, during a conference of October 7, 
2005, titled ``Torture and the War on Terrorism'' Case Western Reserve 
University School of Law facilitated discussions with legal scholars 
from across the country focused on international law. The conference 
culminated in adoption of The Cleveland Principles, which express the 
view that acts of torture should never be used or justified as a tool 
of the Global War on Terror.
  International law establishes a normative framework to advance 
international peace and security. The reciprocity of international law 
protects Americans abroad as well as individuals within the control of 
our government. I commend Case Western Reserve University School of Law 
for its leadership on this issue and I would like to enter into the 
Congressional Record, The Cleveland Principles.

  The Cleveland Principles of International Law on the Detention and 
  Treatment of Persons in Connection with ``The Global War on Terror''


                              Introduction

       In the context of revelations about the mistreatment of 
     detainees at U.S. detention centers in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, 
     and Afghanistan; the practice of ``irregular rendition'' as a 
     means of outsourcing torture; the existence of US-created 
     ``black sites'' where ``ghost detainees'' are interrogated 
     abroad; and the content of the leaked ``White House Torture 
     memos''--the Cleveland Principles were adopted by the 
     undersigned experts who took part in the ``Torture and the 
     War on Terror'' Conference at Case Western Reserve University 
     School of Law in Cleveland, Ohio, on October 7, 2005. The 
     Principles have been endorsed by the numerous other experts 
     whose names are also listed below. The undersigned include 
     current and former high-ranking government, military, and 
     international organization officials, prominent academics, 
     and leading practitioners in the field--representing all ends 
     of the political spectrum. The Principles are intended as a 
     clear restatement, written in plain English, of the 
     fundamental international legal rules that apply to the 
     treatment of persons in connection with the so-called 
     ``Global War on Terror.'' The goal was to produce a text that 
     would be easy for the American public, members of the 
     military, and members of Congress to understand--a text 
     that would unambiguously spell out that in the context of 
     the Global War on Terror, there is no law-free zone, 
     torture can never be justified; outsourcing torture is 
     unlawful; and that government personnel may be criminally 
     liable for involvement in acts of torture.


                        The Cleveland Principles

       Principle 1: With respect to the ``Global War on Terror,'' 
     there is no law-free zone.
       International Law (which includes International 
     Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and 
     International Criminal Law) applies to all contexts and 
     persons in the ``Global War on Terror.''
       The ``Global War on Terror'' is not in its entirety an 
     armed conflict. When, and for so long as, the ``Global War on 
     Terror'' does manifest itself in armed conflict, the rights 
     of persons detained and the obligations of detaining 
     authorities, are governed by International Humanitarian Law, 
     including the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional 
     Protocols to the Geneva Conventions.
       International Human Rights Law, including the Convention 
     Against Torture and the Covenant on Civil and Political 
     Rights, also applies to situations of armed conflict, to the 
     extent that its provisions are not inconsistent with 
     applicable international humanitarian law.
       Whenever persons are detained outside the factual framework 
     of armed conflict, international humanitarian law is not 
     applicable and international human rights law, including the 
     Convention Against Torture and the Covenant on Civil and 
     Political Rights, applies instead.
       Principle 2: Whenever there is any doubt about whether an 
     individual apprehended in the Global War on Terror is 
     entitled to Prisoner of War status, the decision must be made 
     on a case-by-case basis by a competent tribunal.
       Persons who do not qualify for POW status under the Third 
     Geneva Convention are still entitled to humane treatment and 
     the other applicable guarantees of the Fourth Geneva 
     Convention.
       In addition, such persons must not be subject to acts of 
     torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, in 
     accordance with the Torture Convention.
       Principle 3: Nothing in the ``Global War on Terror'' can 
     justify violating the prohibition on committing acts of 
     torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
       Interrogation in the context of the ``Global War on 
     Terror,'' whether conducted by military personnel or 
     intelligence agents, and whether conducted inside or outside 
     of the State's territory, must never cross the boundaries of 
     humane treatment.
       Principle 4: Use of so-called ``irregular rendition'' as a 
     means of outsourcing torture to third countries is unlawful.
       No person acting as an agent of a government may 
     participate in the transfer of any person to any country for 
     interrogation where there are substantial grounds for 
     believing that the person would be in danger of being subject 
     to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
       Diplomatic assurances from the receiving State that the 
     person will not be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman 
     or degrading treatment are not a sufficient basis upon which 
     it may be determined that such treatment or punishment will 
     not be imposed, where the receiving State has demonstrated a 
     history of engaging in such treatment.
       Principle 5: Governments and Government personnel are 
     obligated to strictly adhere to the international law 
     applicable to the ``Global War on Terror'' as set forth in 
     the above principles.
       States are responsible under international law for 
     violations of these principles committed by the Government's 
     personnel or agents, or by private parties exercising 
     traditional government functions with the Government's 
     acquiescence, whether the act occurs in the territory of the 
     State or outside the territory of the State.

[[Page E549]]

       Persons who breach or order violations of these principles, 
     or who aid and abet the breach of these principles, or who 
     fail to punish subordinates who have committed breaches of 
     these principles, may face individual criminal liability at 
     home and/or in foreign or international courts.

                          ____________________