[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 192 (Friday, December 14, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Page S15648]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                TORTURE

  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, as co-chairman of the Helsinki 
Commission, I chaired a field hearing this week at the University of 
Maryland College Park campus. The title of that hearing was ``Is It 
Torture Yet?''--the same question I was left with after Attorney 
General Michael Mukasey's nomination hearings.
  The day of the hearings was also International Human Rights Day, 
which commemorates the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human 
Rights nearly 60 years ago. The historic document declares, ``No one 
shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading 
treatment or punishment.''
  In the Helsinki process, the United States has joined with 55 other 
participating States to condemn torture. I want to quote one particular 
provision, because it speaks with such singular clarity. In 1989, in 
the Vienna Concluding Document, the United States--along with the 
Soviet Union and all of the other participating States--agreed to 
``ensure that all individuals in detention or incarceration will be 
treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the 
human person.'' This is the standard--with no exceptions or loopholes--
that the United States is obligated to uphold.
  I deeply regret that six decades after the adoption of the Universal 
Declaration, we find it necessary to hold a hearing on torture and, 
more to the point, I regret that the United States' own policies and 
practices must be a focus of our consideration.
  As a member of the Helsinki Commission, I have long been concerned 
about the persistence of torture and other forms of abuse in the OSCE 
region. For example, I am troubled by the pattern of torture in 
Uzbekistan--a country to which the United States has extradited terror 
suspects. Radio Free Europe reported that in November alone two 
individuals died while in the custody of the state. When their bodies 
were returned to their families, they bore the markings of torture. 
And, as our hearing began, we were notified that a third individual had 
died under the same circumstances.
  Torture remains a serious problem in a number of OSCE countries, 
particularly in the Russian region of Chechnya. If the United States is 
to address these issues credibly, we must get our own house in order.
  Unfortunately, U.S. leadership in opposition to torture and other 
forms of ill-treatment has been undermined by revelations of abuse at 
Abu Ghraib prison and elsewhere. When Secretary of State Rice met with 
leading human rights activists in Moscow in October, she was made aware 
that the American forces' conduct at Abu Ghraib has damaged the United 
States' credibility on human rights.
  As horrific as the revelations of abuse at Abu Ghraib were, our 
Government's own legal memos on torture may be even more damaging, 
because they reflect a policy to condone torture and immunize those who 
may have committed torture.
  In this regard, I was deeply disappointed by the unwillingness of 
Attorney General Mukasey to state clearly and unequivocally that 
waterboarding is torture. I chaired part of the Attorney General's 
Judiciary confirmation hearing and found his responses to torture-
related questions woefully inadequate. On November 14, I participated 
in another Judiciary Committee hearing at which an El Salvadoran 
torture survivor testified. This medical doctor, who can no longer 
practice surgery because of the torture inflicted upon him, wanted to 
make one thing very clear: as someone who had been the victim of what 
his torturers called ``the bucket treatment,'' he said, waterboarding 
is torture.
  This week, this issue came up again--this time at the Senate 
Judiciary Committee's hearing on Guantanamo. One of the witnesses was 
BG Thomas Hartman, who was specifically asked whether evidence obtained 
by waterboarding was admissible in Guantanamo legal proceedings. Like 
Judge Mukasey, he would not directly answer that question. Nor would he 
respond directly when asked if a circumstance arose--hypothetically--
whether waterboarding by Iranians of a U.S. airman shot down over Iran 
would be legal according to the Geneva Conventions. In fact, the Geneva 
Conventions prohibit the use of any coercive interrogation methods to 
obtain information from a Prisoner of War. I am deeply concerned that 
the administration's efforts to avoid calling waterboarding what it 
is--torture--is undermining the interpretation of the Geneva 
Conventions, which we have relied upon for decades to protect our own 
service men and women.
  The destruction of tapes by the CIA showing the interrogation of 
terror suspects raises a host of additional concerns. First, these 
tapes may have documented the use of methods that may very well have 
violated U.S. law. Second, the tapes may have been destroyed in 
violation of court orders to preserve exactly these sorts of materials. 
If the administration is willing to destroy evidence in violation of a 
valid court order, we have a serious rule-of-law problem. Finally, it 
is profoundly disturbing that materials formally and explicitly sought 
by the 9/11 Commission--mandated to investigate one of the worst 
attacks on American soil in the history of our country--were not turned 
over by the CIA. The destruction of the CIA tapes should be carefully 
investigated.
  Mr. President, the Congress must act to ensure that abuses by U.S. 
Government personnel are not committed on the false theory that this 
somehow makes our country safer.

                          ____________________