[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 19]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 27072-27073]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 TORTURE POLICIES UNDERCUT U.S. LEADERSHIP ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DEMOCRACY 
                          AND THE RULE OF LAW

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 12, 2007

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, as Chairman of the Commission 
on Security and Cooperation in Europe, I would like to draw the 
attention of my colleagues to two events last week that, taken 
together, illustrate the damaging effect that this administration's 
policies have had on America's credibility as a global leader on human 
rights, democracy and the rule of law.
  First of all, on Friday, the 56 OSCE participating States concluded 
their annual Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw, Poland. 
This meeting is Europe's largest regional human rights forum where 
governments and nongovernmental organizations gather to take stock of 
how countries are implementing the commitments they have undertaken in 
the Helsinki process relating to human rights and democracy. As such, 
this meeting provides an important opportunity for the United States to 
raise and express concern about serious instances of noncompliance and 
negative trends in the expansive OSCE region stretching from Vancouver 
to Vladivostok.
  Separately, on Thursday of last week--just as the Warsaw meeting was 
drawing to a close--the New York Times ran an article revealing the 
existence of two classified legal memos authorizing the use of 
interrogation techniques that, to many reasonable minds, rise to the 
level of torture, or at least cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or 
punishment--both categories of treatment prohibited under the United 
Nations Convention Against Torture, to which the United States is a 
party. These memos have already been dubbed by some as ``torture memo 
2.0'' and ``torture memo 3.0,'' and were reportedly authored by Steven 
G. Bradbury, who has headed the Department of Justice's Office of Legal 
Counsel since 2005.
  Madam Speaker, 3 years ago the world was shocked--and the United 
States was shamed--by pictures showing detainees standing on boxes with 
hoods over their heads and electrical wires attached to their fingers. 
But perhaps even more shocking and more shameful was the surfacing of 
the so-called ``torture memo,'' adopted by the Department of

[[Page 27073]]

Justice in 2002 and leaked to the public in 2004. The very existence of 
such a memo was rightly and widely understood to mean that abuses did 
not just occur by rogue elements or as an aberration, but stemmed from 
a government policy to effectively authorize the use of torture and 
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The 2002 memo was 
so scandalous that shortly after it was leaked, it was disavowed by the 
Department of Justice itself.
  For many people, the existence of ``torture memo 2.0'' and ``torture 
memo 3.0'' will not come as a surprise but rather as a confirmation of 
what they suspected to be the case. Certainly, when one looks at the 
statements issued by the President when he signed into law the 2005 
Detainee Treatment Act and the 2006 Military Commissions Act, there was 
every indication that he considered himself in no way bound by those 
laws as passed by Congress.
  There are, of course, enormous implications for the United States 
when the President considers himself beyond the reach of the Congress 
and outside the scope of the Constitution. The President's policies on 
torture have seriously undercut American credibility on the very issues 
this administration purports to hold dear--human rights and democracy 
promotion.
  Can you imagine being at a meeting--like the one that has just 
concluded in Warsaw--where the United States is supposed to express its 
concern about a whole range of human rights issues, including the issue 
of protecting human rights while combating terrorism, when this latest 
revelation about this administration's torture policies hits the front 
pages?
  Regrettably, American credibility as an advocate for human rights and 
democracy has continued in free fall in the face of this latest 
revelation and attendant implausible denials. Beyond the victims of 
abuse themselves, U.S. interests are being seriously undermined, 
including the campaign to win hearts and minds around the globe.
  Not surprisingly, the administration's dissembling denials cannot 
repair the damage that has been done. It will take considerable time to 
restore the good name of our country--time, and concrete action by this 
body.
  In such circumstances, actions speak louder than words, and two steps 
must be taken to help restore America's tarnished reputation, help 
clear out the thicket of legal cases created by the President's 
disastrous policies, and position the United States to build more 
effective alliances in our counterterrorism operations.
  First, I urge my colleagues to restore habeas corpus--and the sooner, 
the better. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 was a travesty of 
justice, but perhaps no part of that legislation departed so sharply 
from our legal heritage as the decision to deny individuals the most 
basic right recognized since the Magna Carta: the right to challenge 
their detention. If we are to convince the world that we do not 
routinely torture terrorism suspects, providing these detainees one of 
the most basic legal safeguards is a good place to start.
  Second, we must close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay--a 
measure I called for at a hearing on Guantanamo I chaired in June. To 
this end, the United States should release or transfer detainees 
elsewhere and, for those whom we believe we must hold and try, 
detainees should be transferred to the United States. Terror suspects 
can be tried by our Federal courts; they might be tried by military 
commissions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice; I'd even 
consider the establishment of special domestic terror courts, as in 
Spain. But it is time for the President to listen to his own senior 
officials, including Secretaries Gates and Rice, and close the GTMO 
camp.
  Madam Speaker, while these two steps are not the only ones necessary 
to fully restore America's credibility and respect for the values we 
proclaim abroad, they would represent an important start. It is time 
for this great country to resume its rightful leadership role on human 
rights, democracy and rule of law, but first, it will need to lead by 
example.

                          ____________________