[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 12]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 17399-17400]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             MEDICAL EVIDENCE OF TORTURE BY U.S. PERSONNEL

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 29, 2008

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, last week the Helsinki 
Commission, which I Chair, held a briefing at which representatives 
from Physicians for Human Rights presented the findings of their 
recently published report, ``Broken Laws, Broken Lives.'' In it, they 
documented the medical evidence of torture by U.S. personnel in 11 
specific cases. I believe this briefing was the first opportunity on 
Capitol Hill for the public to hear specifically about the medical 
consequences of the administration's detention policies and to consider 
some of the ethical questions related to the medical treatment of 
detainees, including forced feeding and the possible role of medical 
professionals during interrogations.
  We were fortunate to have with us as panelists Leonard Rubenstein, 
J.D., President of Physicians for Human Rights; Dr. Allen Keller, 
Advisor to Physicians for Human Rights and Director of the Bellevue/NYU 
Program for Survivors of Torture; and Dr. Scott Allen, also an Advisor 
to Physicians for Human Rights.
  For many years, members of the Helsinki Commission have been actively 
engaged on issues related to torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading 
treatment or punishment. Over the years, we have raised concern about 
the nearly constant reports of torture and abuse in Chechnya. We have 
pressed Turkey to provide detainees with prompt access to lawyers and 
medical personnel, because we know that when people are held 
incommunicado, they are more likely to experience torture. We have 
expressed alarm regarding the number of people who walk into Uzbekistan 
jails on their own two feet--and who have been returned to their 
families in boxes.
  Last week, it was my sad duty to hear representatives from Physicians 
for Human Rights describe the torture and ill-treatment some detainees 
have experienced at the hands of U.S. personnel. As I noted then, I 
certainly expected to hear about the medical and psychological impact 
of this torture on the individuals whose cases were investigated by 
Physicians for Human Rights. But, coincidently, there was a different 
kind of impact on display last week, when the U.S. also opened its 
first war crimes trial since World War II.
  In the trial of Salim Hamdan, alleged to be Osama bin Laden's driver, 
the military judge overseeing the case found it necessary to exclude 
from evidence several statements of the defendant because they were 
obtained under what the military judge deemed ``highly coercive'' 
conditions. Another one of the government's efforts to bring a 
defendant before a military tribunal had already been put indefinitely 
on hold, reportedly because the evidence in the case cannot be 
disentangled from the impermissible methods that were used to extract 
it. In other words, the use of abusive interrogation methods has 
undermined the government's ability to prosecute people suspected of 
terrorism or terrorism-related crimes.
  Let me repeat: the ill-conceived policy of ``enhanced 
interrogations'' has undermined our country's ability to prosecute 
people for the most serious crimes committed against this nation.
  As it happened, on the day of our briefing last week, the ACLU 
released three new ``torture memos'' it had obtained through the 
Freedom of Information Act. Although highly redacted--indeed, one of 
them has ten pages that are entirely blacked out--these documents 
nevertheless provide some additional insight into the development of 
the policies that set the stage for what Major General Antonio Taguba, 
in his preface for the Physicians for Human Rights report, called ``a 
systematic regime of torture.'' (You may recall that General Taguba led 
the U.S. Army's official investigations into the Abu Ghraib prisoner 
abuse scandal.)
  Here's just one bit of information we now have from a memo prepared 
by the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel on August 1, 
2002 and released last week. This memo, prepared for the CIA, advises 
that the crime of torture, as defined by U.S. statute, requires a 
showing of specific intent to cause severe pain or suffering. That 
specific intent, in turn, will be negated if a defendant acts with a 
good faith belief that his actions will not cause severe pain or 
suffering. That good faith belief can be demonstrated by showing that 
an official acted in reliance on the advice of experts. And guess what? 
The Office of Legal

[[Page 17400]]

Counsel is a bunch of experts. And they go on to say that the objective 
of the interrogation techniques under discussion--we don't know 
precisely what they are because they're blacked out--is not to cause 
severe physical pain. Just like magic, you have your expert advice, 
which gives you your good-faith belief, which negates the specific 
intent required under the statute which criminalizes torture. So you 
guys can go ahead and waterboard and God knows what else because the 
Office of Legal Counsel has told you that it does not cause severe pain 
or suffering, so you have legal license to ignore your own eyes and 
ears, which tell you that waterboarding will break a person in minutes.
  Madam Speaker, the report by Physicians for Human Rights makes 
several recommendations that deserve study and consideration. But in 
light of the release of these most recent torture memos, I would like 
to highlight today one particular recommendation of the report: ``The 
U.S. Department of Justice should publicly release all legal opinions 
and other memoranda concerning standards regarding interrogation and 
detention policy and practices.''
  The Department of Justice is the arbiter of what is the law of the 
land for this country. And I think the American people have a right to 
know if their government has sought to redefine ``torture'' as ``not 
torture.'' Accordingly, I urge the Attorney General to release the full 
texts of all the memos relating to interrogation and detention policies 
and practices.

                          ____________________