Workers Daily Internet Edition Year 2004 No. 64

Year 2004 No. 64, May 12, 2004	ARCHIVE	HOME	JBBOOKS	SUBSCRIBE

Daily On Line Newspaper of the
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
170, Wandsworth Road, London, SW8 2LA.
Phone: (Local Rate from outside London 0845 644 1979) 020 7627 0599
Web Site: http://www.rcpbml.org.uk
e-mail: office@rcpbml.org.uk
Subscription Rates (Cheques made payable to RCPB(ML)):
Workers' Weekly Printed Edition:
4 issues - £2.95, 6 months - £18.95 for 26 issues, Yearly - £33.95 (including postage)
Workers' Daily Internet Edition sent by e-mail daily (Text e-mail):
1 issue free, 6 months £5, Yearly £10

Torture At Abu Ghraib

by SEYMOUR M. HERSH

Posted 30.04.2004

In the era of Saddam Hussein, Abu Ghraib, twenty miles west of Baghdad, was one of the world’s most notorious prisons, with torture, weekly executions, and vile living conditions. As many as fifty thousand men and women – no accurate count is possible – were jammed into Abu Ghraib at one time, in twelve-by-twelve-foot cells that were little more than human holding pits.

In the looting that followed the regime’s collapse, last April, the huge prison complex, by then deserted, was stripped of everything that could be removed, including doors, windows, and bricks. The coalition authorities had the floors tiled, cells cleaned and repaired, and toilets, showers, and a new medical centre added. Abu Ghraib was now a US military prison. Most of the prisoners, however – by the fall there were several thousand, including women and teen-agers – were civilians, many of whom had been picked up in random military sweeps and at highway checkpoints. They fell into three loosely defined categories: common criminals; security detainees suspected of "crimes against the coalition"; and a small number of suspected "high-value" leaders of the insurgency against the coalition forces.

Last June, Janis Karpinski, an Army reserve brigadier general, was named commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade and put in charge of military prisons in Iraq. General Karpinski, the only female commander in the war zone, was an experienced operations and intelligence officer who had served with the Special Forces and in the 1991 Gulf War, but she had never run a prison system. Now she was in charge of three large jails, eight battalions, and thirty-four hundred Army reservists, most of whom, like her, had no training in handling prisoners.

General Karpinski, who had wanted to be a soldier since she was five, is a business consultant in civilian life, and was enthusiastic about her new job. In an interview last December with the St. Petersburg Times, she said that, for many of the Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib, "living conditions now are better in prison than at home. At one point we were concerned that they wouldn’t want to leave."

A month later, General Karpinski was formally admonished and quietly suspended, and a major investigation into the Army’s prison system, authorized by Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior commander in Iraq, was under way. A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating. Specifically, Taguba found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of "sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses" at Abu Ghraib. This systematic and illegal abuse of detainees, Taguba reported, was perpetrated by soldiers of the 372nd Military Police Company, and also by members of the American intelligence community. (The 372nd was attached to the 320th M.P. Battalion, which reported to Karpinski’s brigade headquarters.) Taguba’s report listed some of the wrongdoing:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

There was stunning evidence to support the allegations, Taguba added – "detailed witness statements and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence." Photographs and videos taken by the soldiers as the abuses were happening were not included in his report, Taguba said, because of their "extremely sensitive nature."

The photographs – several of which were broadcast on CBS’s "60 Minutes 2" last week – show leering Gils taunting naked Iraqi prisoners who are forced to assume humiliating poses. Six suspects – Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick II, known as Chip, who was the senior enlisted man; Specialist Charles A. Graner; Sergeant Javal Davis; Specialist Megan Ambuhl; Specialist Sabrina Harman; and Private Jeremy Sivits – are now facing prosecution in Iraq, on charges that include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty toward prisoners, maltreatment, assault, and indecent acts. A seventh suspect, Private Lynndie England, was reassigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, after becoming pregnant.

The photographs tell it all. In one, Private England, a cigarette dangling from her mouth, is giving a jaunty thumbs-up sign and pointing at the genitals of a young Iraqi, who is naked except for a sandbag over his head, as he masturbates. Three other hooded and naked Iraqi prisoners are shown, hands reflexively crossed over their genitals. A fifth prisoner has his hands at his sides. In another, England stands arm in arm with Specialist Graner; both are grinning and giving the thumbs-up behind a cluster of perhaps seven naked Iraqis, knees bent, piled clumsily on top of each other in a pyramid. There is another photograph of a cluster of naked prisoners, again piled in a pyramid. Near them stands Graner, smiling, his arms crossed; a woman soldier stands in front of him, bending over, and she, too, is smiling. Then, there is another cluster of hooded bodies, with a female soldier standing in front, taking photographs. Yet another photograph shows a kneeling, naked, unhooded male prisoner, head momentarily turned away from the camera, posed to make it appear that he is performing oral sex on another male prisoner, who is naked and hooded.

Such dehumanisation is unacceptable in any culture, but it is especially so in the Arab world. Homosexual acts are against Islamic law and it is humiliating for men to be naked in front of other men, Bernard Haykel, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University, explained. "Being put on top of each other and forced to masturbate, being naked in front of each other – it’s all a form of torture," Haykel said.

Two Iraqi faces that do appear in the photographs are those of dead men. There is the battered face of prisoner No. 153399, and the bloodied body of another prisoner, wrapped in cellophane and packed in ice. There is a photograph of an empty room, splattered with blood.

The 372nd’s abuse of prisoners seemed almost routine – a fact of Army life that the soldiers felt no need to hide. On April 9th, at an Article 32 hearing (the military equivalent of a grand jury) in the case against Sergeant Frederick, at Camp Victory, near Baghdad, one of the witnesses, Specialist Matthew Wisdom, an M.P., told the courtroom what happened when he and other soldiers delivered seven prisoners, hooded and bound, to the so-called "hard site" at Abu Ghraib – seven tiers of cells where the inmates who were considered the most dangerous were housed. The men had been accused of starting a riot in another section of the prison. Wisdom said:

SFC Snider grabbed my prisoner and threw him into a pile. . . . I do not think it was right to put them in a pile. I saw SSG Frederic, SGT Davis and CPL Graner walking around the pile hitting the prisoners. I remember SSG Frederick hitting one prisoner in the side of its [sic] ribcage. The prisoner was no danger to SSG Frederick. . . . I left after that.

When he returned later, Wisdom testified:

I saw two naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth open. I thought I should just get out of there. I didn’t think it was right . . . I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, "Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds." I heard PFC England shout out, "He’s getting hard."

Wisdom testified that he told his superiors what had happened, and assumed that "the issue was taken care of." He said, "I just didn’t want to be part of anything that looked criminal."

The abuses became public because of the outrage of Specialist Joseph M. Darby, an M.P. whose role emerged during the Article 32 hearing against Chip Frederick. A government witness, Special Agent Scott Bobeck, who is a member of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division, or C.I.D., told the court, according to an abridged transcript made available to me, "The investigation started after SPC Darby . . . got a CD from CPL Graner. . . . He came across pictures of naked detainees." Bobeck said that Darby had "initially put an anonymous letter under our door, then he later came forward and gave a sworn statement. He felt very bad about it and thought it was very wrong."

Questioned further, the Army investigator said that Frederick and his colleagues had not been given any "training guidelines" that he was aware of. The MPs in the 372nd had been assigned to routine traffic and police duties upon their arrival in Iraq, in the spring of 2003. In October of 2003, the 372nd was ordered to prison-guard duty at Abu Ghraib. Frederick, at thirty-seven, was far older than his colleagues, and was a natural leader; he had also worked for six years as a guard for the Virginia Department of Corrections. Bobeck explained:

What I got is that SSG Frederick and CPL Graner were road MPs and were put in charge because they were civilian prison guards and had knowledge of how things were supposed to be run.

Bobeck also testified that witnesses had said that Frederick, on one occasion, "had punched a detainee in the chest so hard that the detainee almost went into cardiac arrest."

At the Article 32 hearing, the Army informed Frederick and his attorneys, Captain Robert Shuck, an Army lawyer, and Gary Myers, a civilian, that two dozen witnesses they had sought, including General Karpinski and all of Frederick’s co-defendants, would not appear. Some had been excused after exercising their Fifth Amendment right; others were deemed to be too far away from the courtroom. "The purpose of an Article 32 hearing is for us to engage witnesses and discover facts," Gary Myers told me. "We ended up with a c.i.d. agent and no alleged victims to examine." After the hearing, the presiding investigative officer ruled that there was sufficient evidence to convene a court-martial against Frederick.

Myers, who was one of the military defence attorneys in the My Lai prosecutions of the nineteen-seventies, told me that his client’s defence will be that he was carrying out the orders of his superiors and, in particular, the directions of military intelligence. He said, "Do you really think a group of kids from rural Virginia decided to do this on their own? Decided that the best way to embarrass Arabs and make them talk was to have them walk around nude?"

In letters and e-mails to family members, Frederick repeatedly noted that the military-intelligence teams, which included C.I.A. officers and linguists and interrogation specialists from private defence contractors, were the dominant force inside Abu Ghraib. In a letter written in January, he said:

I questioned some of the things that I saw . . . such things as leaving inmates in their cell with no clothes or in female underpants, handcuffing them to the door of their cell – and the answer I got was, "This is how military intelligence (MI) wants it done." . . . . MI has also instructed us to place a prisoner in an isolation cell with little or no clothes, no toilet or running water, no ventilation or window, for as much as three days.

The military-intelligence officers have "encouraged and told us, ‘Great job,’ they were now getting positive results and information," Frederick wrote. "CID has been present when the military working dogs were used to intimidate prisoners at MI’s request." At one point, Frederick told his family, he pulled aside his superior officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Phillabaum, the commander of the 320th M.P. Battalion, and asked about the mistreatment of prisoners. "His reply was ‘Don’t worry about it.’"

In November, Frederick wrote, an Iraqi prisoner under the control of what the Abu Ghraib guards called "O.G.A.," or other government agencies – that is, the C.I.A. and its paramilitary employees – was brought to his unit for questioning. "They stressed him out so bad that the man passed away. They put his body in a body bag and packed him in ice for approximately twenty-four hours in the shower. . . . The next day the medics came and put his body on a stretcher, placed a fake IV in his arm and took him away." The dead Iraqi was never entered into the prison’s inmate-control system, Frederick recounted, "and therefore never had a number."

Frederick’s defence is, of course, highly self-serving. But the complaints in his letters and e-mails home were reinforced by two internal Army reports – Taguba’s and one by the Army’s chief law-enforcement officer, Provost Marshal Donald Ryder, a major general.

Last fall, General Sanchez ordered Ryder to review the prison system in Iraq and recommend ways to improve it. Ryder’s report, filed on November 5th, concluded that there were potential human-rights, training, and manpower issues, system-wide, that needed immediate attention. It also discussed serious concerns about the tension between the missions of the military police assigned to guard the prisoners and the intelligence teams who wanted to interrogate them. Army regulations limit intelligence activity by the MPs to passive collection. But something had gone wrong at Abu Ghraib.

There was evidence dating back to the Afghanistan war, the Ryder report said, that MPs had worked with intelligence operatives to "set favourable conditions for subsequent interviews" – a euphemism for breaking the will of prisoners. "Such actions generally run counter to the smooth operation of a detention facility, attempting to maintain its population in a compliant and docile state." General Karpinski’s brigade, Ryder reported, "has not been directed to change its facility procedures to set the conditions for MI interrogations, nor participate in those interrogations." Ryder called for the establishment of procedures to "define the role of military police soldiers . . .clearly separating the actions of the guards from those of the military intelligence personnel." The officers running the war in Iraq were put on notice.

Ryder undercut his warning, however, by concluding that the situation had not yet reached a crisis point. Though some procedures were flawed, he said, he found "no military police units purposely applying inappropriate confinement practices." His investigation was at best a failure and at worst a cover-up.

Taguba, in his report, was polite but direct in refuting his fellow-general. "Unfortunately, many of the systemic problems that surfaced during [Ryder’s] assessment are the very same issues that are the subject of this investigation," he wrote. "In fact, many of the abuses suffered by detainees occurred during, or near to, the time of that assessment." The report continued, "Contrary to the findings of MG Ryder’s report, I find that personnel assigned to the 372nd MP Company, 800th MP Brigade were directed to change facility procedures to ‘set the conditions’ for MI interrogations." Army intelligence officers, C.I.A. agents, and private contractors "actively requested that MP guards set physical and mental conditions for favourable interrogation of witnesses."

Taguba backed up his assertion by citing evidence from sworn statements to Army C.I.D. investigators. Specialist Sabrina Harman, one of the accused MPs, testified that it was her job to keep detainees awake, including one hooded prisoner who was placed on a box with wires attached to his fingers, toes, and penis. She stated, "MI wanted to get them to talk. It is Graner and Frederick’s job to do things for MI and OGA to get these people to talk."

Another witness, Sergeant Javal Davis, who is also one of the accused, told C.I.D. investigators, "I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section . . . being made to do various things that I would question morally. . . . We were told that they had different rules." Taguba wrote, "Davis also stated that he had heard MI insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: ‘Loosen this guy up for us.’ ‘Make sure he has a bad night.’ ‘Make sure he gets the treatment.’" Military intelligence made these comments to Graner and Frederick, Davis said. "The MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Graner compliments . . . statements like, ‘Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information.’"

When asked why he did not inform his chain of command about the abuse, Sergeant Davis answered, "Because I assumed that if they were doing things out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something. Also the wing" – where the abuse took place – "belongs to MI and it appeared MI personnel approved of the abuse."

Another witness, Specialist Jason Kennel, who was not accused of wrongdoing, said, "I saw them nude, but MI would tell us to take away their mattresses, sheets, and clothes." (It was his view, he added, that if M.I. wanted him to do this "they needed to give me paperwork.") Taguba also cited an interview with Adel L. Nakhla, a translator who was an employee of Titan, a civilian contractor. He told of one night when a "bunch of people from MI" watched as a group of handcuffed and shackled inmates were subjected to abuse by Graner and Frederick.

General Taguba saved his harshest words for the military-intelligence officers and private contractors. He recommended that Colonel Thomas Pappas, the commander of one of the M.I. brigades, be reprimanded and receive non-judicial punishment, and that Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan, the former director of the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Centre, be relieved of duty and reprimanded. He further urged that a civilian contractor, Steven Stephanowicz, of CACI International, be fired from his Army job, reprimanded, and denied his security clearances for lying to the investigating team and allowing or ordering military policemen "who were not trained in interrogation techniques to facilitate interrogations by ‘setting conditions’ which were neither authorized" nor in accordance with Army regulations. "He clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse," Taguba wrote. He also recommended disciplinary action against a second CACI employee, John Israel. (A spokeswoman for CACI said that the company had "received no formal communication" from the Army about the matter.)

"I suspect," Taguba concluded, that Pappas, Jordan, Stephanowicz, and Israel "were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuse at Abu Ghraib," and strongly recommended immediate disciplinary action.

The problems inside the Army prison system in Iraq were not hidden from senior commanders. During Karpinski’s seven-month tour of duty, Taguba noted, there were at least a dozen officially reported incidents involving escapes, attempted escapes, and other serious security issues that were investigated by officers of the 800th M.P. Brigade. Some of the incidents had led to the killing or wounding of inmates and MPs, and resulted in a series of "lessons learned" inquiries within the brigade. Karpinski invariably approved the reports and signed orders calling for changes in day-to-day procedures. But Taguba found that she did not follow up, doing nothing to insure that the orders were carried out. Had she done so, he added, "cases of abuse may have been prevented."

General Taguba further found that Abu Ghraib was filled beyond capacity, and that the M.P. guard force was significantly undermanned and short of resources. "This imbalance has contributed to the poor living conditions, escapes, and accountability lapses," he wrote. There were gross differences, Taguba said, between the actual number of prisoners on hand and the number officially recorded. A lack of proper screening also meant that many innocent Iraqis were wrongly being detained – indefinitely, it seemed, in some cases. The Taguba study noted that more than sixty per cent of the civilian inmates at Abu Ghraib were deemed not to be a threat to society, which should have enabled them to be released. Karpinski’s defence, Taguba said, was that her superior officers "routinely" rejected her recommendations regarding the release of such prisoners.

Karpinski was rarely seen at the prisons she was supposed to be running, Taguba wrote. He also found a wide range of administrative problems, including some that he considered "without precedent in my military career." The soldiers, he added, were "poorly prepared and untrained . . . prior to deployment, at the mobilization site, upon arrival in theatre, and throughout the mission."

General Taguba spent more than four hours interviewing Karpinski, whom he described as extremely emotional: "What I found particularly disturbing in her testimony was her complete unwillingness to either understand or accept that many of the problems inherent in the 800th MP Brigade were caused or exacerbated by poor leadership and the refusal of her command to both establish and enforce basic standards and principles among its soldiers."

Taguba recommended that Karpinski and seven brigade military-police officers and enlisted men be relieved of command and formally reprimanded. No criminal proceedings were suggested for Karpinski; apparently, the loss of promotion and the indignity of a public rebuke were seen as enough punishment.

After the story broke on CBS last week, the Pentagon announced that Major General Geoffrey Miller, the new head of the Iraqi prison system, had arrived in Baghdad and was on the job. He had been the commander of the Guantánamo Bay detention centre. General Sanchez also authorized an investigation into possible wrongdoing by military and civilian interrogators.

As the international furore grew, senior military officers, and President Bush, insisted that the actions of a few did not reflect the conduct of the military as a whole. Taguba’s report, however, amounts to an unsparing study of collective wrongdoing and the failure of Army leadership at the highest levels. The picture he draws of Abu Ghraib is one in which Army regulations and the Geneva conventions were routinely violated, and in which much of the day-to-day management of the prisoners was abdicated to Army military-intelligence units and civilian contract employees. Interrogating prisoners and getting intelligence, including by intimidation and torture, was the priority.

The mistreatment at Abu Ghraib may have done little to further American intelligence, however. Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as a C.I.D. agent, told me that the use of force or humiliation with prisoners is invariably counterproductive. "They’ll tell you what you want to hear, truth or no truth," Rowell said. "‘You can flog me until I tell you what I know you want me to say.’ You don’t get righteous information."

Under the fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power can jail civilians who pose an "imperative" security threat, but it must establish a regular procedure for insuring that only civilians who remain a genuine security threat be kept imprisoned. Prisoners have the right to appeal any internment decision and have their cases reviewed. Human Rights Watch complained to Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld that civilians in Iraq remained in custody month after month with no charges brought against them. Abu Ghraib had become, in effect, another Guantánamo.

As the photographs from Abu Ghraib make clear, these detentions have had enormous consequences: for the imprisoned civilian Iraqis, many of whom had nothing to do with the growing insurgency; for the integrity of the Army; and for the United States’ reputation in the world.

Captain Robert Shuck, Frederick’s military attorney, closed his defence at the Article 32 hearing last month by saying that the Army was "attempting to have these six soldiers atone for its sins." Similarly, Gary Myers, Frederick’s civilian attorney, told me that he would argue at the court-martial that culpability in the case extended far beyond his client. "I’m going to drag every involved intelligence officer and civilian contractor I can find into court," he said. "Do you really believe the Army relieved a general officer because of six soldiers? Not a chance."

Furious Iraqis Wait at the Gates of Abu Ghraib

Not From Them

Hasan Abu Nimah, Electronic Iraq, 5 May 2004

For the last twenty-four hours I have been trying to absorb the shock of the chilling images that appeared on television showing the degrading treatment and torture suffered by Iraqi prisoners at the hands of American and British soldiers.

I am fully aware that in war atrocities are often committed, and immense human suffering is the norm. At the age of twelve, I was forced to flee in fright and paralysing panic with my younger sister and frail mother, with the few belongings we could carry, when our little village near Jerusalem came under Jewish attack in early 1948. Along with the rest of the villagers expelled in that act of ethnic cleansing, we spent that summer living under trees in the harshest conditions, until winter scattered us in all directions in search of warmer shelter. We were among the lucky few who were eventually able to return to our village. But our "luck" ran out in 1967, when we came under Israel's tyrannical military occupation which continues until today.

That experience, more than half a century ago, is kept fresh in my mind when I see the enormous suffering endured by millions of Palestinians who daily bear unspeakable cruelty, pain, injustice and dehumanisation. It can never fade from memory.

We live in a region that has seen constant conflicts, crises and instability. With the increasing atrocities and war crimes committed every day in Palestine, one might expect that the torture of a few Iraqi prisoners would hardly stand out. But the pictures from Abu Ghraib prison are different. They have caused shock like nothing else in recent memory. They have caused a deeper pain, and inspired a greater horror at the depth to which human cruelty can sink.

If Americans are still asking "why do they hate us", they will find the answer now. For years, the United States has been sowing the seeds of hatred with its unjust policies backed by hypocrisy and outright lies. Yet, despite this, there remained here an affection for America and hope that one day it would mend its ways, cemented in the personal and family connections that so many people in this region have with millions of Arabs, Arab Americans and Americans in the United States. Despite everything, America still represented a chance for a better life.

But the revolting scenes from Abu Ghraib prison have the power to destroy any remaining trace of love or respect for America; or, for that matter, any hope that the ongoing moral degeneration, of "the champion of freedom and democracy" will be reversed any time soon.

The US invasion of Iraq has been a disaster. What is impossible to absorb or understand is how the United States could make such a massive blunder with its eyes wide open. Although it is taboo to say it in America, we know that what lies behind the distortions in US policy is the negative influence of Israel and its supporters. Were it not for Israel, the United States would have no greater reason or incentive to invade Iraq than China would to invade Belgium. Americans need to be told these things and demand a change before we are all consumed by this madness.

When I received the first report about the scandal, I called my son in the US, asking about the expected impact of the images on the American people. His initial reaction was that the Bush government will dissociate itself from the crimes, describe them as isolated actions of undisciplined individuals, and promise to punish them. Americans would probably accept that, he said, and the matter would be closed.

Much of that has indeed happened. President George W. Bush expressed "disgust" at the treatment of the prisoners, adding that "their treatment does not reflect the nature of the American people", that he "did not like it one bit, and that's not the way we do things in America".

Perhaps Bush is sincere about all of that, but neither condemnation nor criminal charges against the responsible soldiers will be enough to mitigate the damage caused by these pictures. America has to do much more to erase this dark, indelible stain of shame and disgrace.

The British government has also condemned scandalous and shameful images published by The Daily Mirror which allegedly show British soldiers torturing Iraqi prisoners. On the Mirror cover, a soldier was photographed in his full military gear urinating on a hooded Iraqi prisoner. In response, a Downing Street spokesman said "we expect the highest standard of conduct from our forces in Iraq despite the difficulties they face".

What one expects is something and what one gets is another. The "highest standard of conduct" ended up subjecting an Iraqi captive to an eight-hour ordeal during which he was threatened with execution, his jaw was broken and his teeth smashed, according to the Mirror, quoting soldiers. "After being beaten and urinated on, he was driven away and dumped from the back of a moving vehicle, the soldiers claimed, unaware if he was dead," the Mirror added.

The spectacle of young male and female occupation soldiers grinning and rejoicing at the scenes of other innocent, helpless people in naked, humiliating and obscene formations and displays is beyond imagination. It is a treatment that more than being criminal, expresses hatred and contempt for human dignity and life; treatment which would be equally condemnable if perpetrated against animals. Is this how the "liberators" view their Iraq mission, and is this their way of winning "the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people?

These are not isolated crimes committed by a few individuals. These crimes are not just violations of international law and the laws of war that can be handled with a prosecution. It is far bigger and more serious than that. The true crime is by those who planned and carried out this unjust and aggressive war, and of the hostile climate they have, for so long, been fostering against Arabs and Muslims.

The behaviour of the torturers is the direct product of this mood. Bush was apparently informed of the horrendous practices since last January. An Amnesty International press release on April 30 confirmed that the organisation had received frequent reports of torture or other ill-treatment by coalition forces. Amnesty said that many witnesses told them that they were abused by US and UK troops during interrogation and that the methods often included prolonged sleep deprivation, prolonged restraint in painful positions, beatings and prolonged exposure to bright lights and loud sound. None of these reports has been adequately investigated by the authorities. Why were the atrocities hidden until the scandal erupted with the vile images hitting TV screens?

Is this why the United States has opposed and tried to sabotage the International Criminal Court? Because it knows that its soldiers in Iraq, as they did in Vietnam, would commit unspeakable and dehumanising crimes?

The war against Iraq was justified on the basis of false premises and lies. When this was revealed, the aggressors tried to justify the war with claims that they were bringing freedom from Saddam Hussein's tyranny, and democracy. With this last fig leaf fallen away, and the situation in Iraq worsening daily, what excuses have they got left to stay in Iraq? They have none, and they should go.

They should never assume the high moral ground of coming to civilise us and teach us how to behave, how to reform, how to promote human rights, how to promote the status of women, how to fight corruption, how to improve education and how to respect the law. Yes, we need all of that, but not from them. We do not want our women to follow the example of that woman torturer who was ecstatic about the pain and humiliation she was inflicting in torture sessions on Iraqi male prisoners. We do not want to learn their inhumanity, their lies, their cruelty, their injustice, their lawlessness, their corruption, their extremist ideologies, their conspiracies, their racism, their contempt and selfishness, their double standards, the terror in their society and their schools, and the evil that is driving them to destroy our world.

If that is what they have to offer, God bless our backwardness and save us from that so-called "freedom".

The writer is former ambassador and former permanent representative of Jordan at the United Nations. This article first appeared in The Jordan Times on 5 May 2004.

An Activist in Iraq
The Not-Quite News About Prisons

By Jo Wilding

May 6th, 2004

The publication of the prisoner abuse photos has rightly caused outrage, but it’s not new and there are many other abuses routinely going on in the prison system. The thing about prison is that you’re locked away. No one can see you unless they’re let in or you’re let out. Suddenly – and I am relieved that the world knows about it at last – the abuse of prisoners in Iraq has become partly visible. The photos made news in a way that countless Iraqi people’s stories did not.

The Christian Peacemaker Team (CPT) has been taking statements and testimonies from released detainees and their relatives for months, as has an awesome Italian woman called Paola Gasparoli, and there are several Iraqi human rights organizations working on individual cases. And yes, they do also work on cases relating to the old government. The pictures which have been published cause outrage, and rightly so, but they are the tip of the iceberg.

Women are often detained because their husbands are wanted. There have been many reports of them being kept naked. There have also been a lot of women detained because they were prostitutes used by high-ranking officials of the old leadership. A woman human-rights worker from one of the major organizations working on detainee issues disappeared into a US prison for two months.

It is known that many women have been detained, including over a dozen bank clerks, to force them to pay for the discrepancy between the genuine currency handed in and that given out in the January changeover, although they were told to pay out new currency for all notes handed in, even suspect ones, because there was no way of verifying which were real. However, to be imprisoned is deeply shameful for a woman, mainly because it is assumed that she will have been raped, so most are unwilling to talk about what happened, even confidentially, and as a result, there is very little information about women detainees.

One prisoner told CPT about hearing rumours of a mass grave under the prison. He said that he and fellow prisoners dug under their tent and found recently dead bodies a few feet down. There were stories, independently back up by various former detainees, of demonstrations against conditions in the camp being brutally suppressed by soldiers, and another man reported one incident where the prisoners were shouting "Freedom" and soldiers opened fire, killing four men and injuring three.

There are reports in the cases known to me, to CPT and to the local human rights organizations of the following:

1. Extrajudicial executions during a raid, which turned out to be on the wrong house.
2. Violent arrests of children from their school.
3. A prisoner having his toenails pried off by guards.
4. Prisoners being forced to swallow liquid.
5. Psychological torture: being left blindfolded in an open-air passage with a tank driving towards them, so they thought they would be run over and killed.
6. A minor reported having his buttocks held apart by soldiers who were kicking his anus.

The following appear routinely throughout the statements of detainees and their families:

* Beating and kicking of prisoners and of residents during house raids; soldiers and

* Guards treading on backs and heads

* Guns being pointed at children or held to their heads during raids.

* Denial of water.

* Denial of food, or very low quantities and poor quality of food, sometimes including pork, which is forbidden for Muslims.

* Denial of blankets, shade or air conditioning.

* Excessive chemicals being added to water so it is dangerous to drink.

* Denial of washing and toilet facilities, both within the prison camps and during long road transfers.

* Hands being tied behind the back for prolonged periods, including when this prevents the prisoners from drinking water.

* Hands being tied so tightly that the arms swell.

* Denial of medical attention or being taken to a military ‘doctor’ who kicks and otherwise abuses, or else ignores and refuses to examine the prisoner.

* Overcrowding of tents so that there is not enough room to lie down to sleep.

* Prisoners being forced to kneel or squat all day and to remain in the sun all day in temperatures of up to 120 degrees F.

* Detention of minors.

* Individuals being kept for their entire detention in only underwear or nightwear, sometimes suffering severe sunburn as a result, having been refused the chance to get dressed when arrested at night.

* Severe verbal abuse.

* Theft of money and jewellery by US soldiers during the raid.

* Failure to return documentation, IDs, passports and other personal property that was with the prisoner when detained.

* Use of Kuwaiti military as translators and prison guards, who are apparently particularly aggressive with Iraqi detainees, believing that they are taking revenge for the 1990 invasion of Kuwait .

Additionally, there is no provision for detainees to be given access to legal advice or representation. From the tome of arrest, it can take weeks even to be processed. There is limited provision for family visits and relatives have to wait at prison gates with the tag number of the prisoner. Most are told to return in several weeks or months.

It may be impossible for the family to find out the tag number, because names are transliterated into English and stored in a computer. There is no standardized transliteration system for Arabic into English, and a tiny difference in the spelling of a name could make it impossible to trace the prisoner, leaving the family uncertain which jail the person is in or even whether he is still alive and lost in the system somewhere.

There is a huge amount of evidence that US forces are acting on false information and "malicious tips", which they do not bother to investigate or verify before carrying out raids and arrests. Accusations include harbouring wanted members of the old regime (who had in fact already been arrested), being a member of the Fedayeen, or trafficking weapons. One man, who had been repeatedly tortured by the Baathists, was jailed for being a Baathist!

The fact that the "information" is false is supported by the reality that so many are released without any charges or evidence being brought against them. Of 63 former or current detainees interviewed by CPT members, not one was convicted of anything. Unfortunately, because the review board meets so irregularly, it can take many months before the release without charge is effected.

Mass arrests also occur, with soldiers seizing every man in a given area after an incident that may have only involved one or two individuals, or during a raid. In some cases, the raid has been on the wrong house and the soldiers have admitted the mistake, but nonetheless arrested the young men in the house.

The detentions often mean the loss of the family’s only earner and the only driver, so that children can’t get to school, and in some cases loss of the family home if they can’t pay the rent. There are indications that some families have managed to retrieve individuals from the prisons by way of bribes to people working with the coalition forces. Others say they would gladly pay if they could find someone reliable to give money to. Depression is ubiquitous among the prisoners and some families report severe behavioural changes following release.

This information relates to US prisons. I’m sorry that I haven’t got any for the British troops in the south. There are one or two local human rights groups down there, but fewer international activists and fewer journalists. The pressure needs to be kept up so the detainees don’t just disappear again. The governments involved have to be pressed for more information and to take responsibility for, and control of, their troops.

Lawyers acting for the US soldiers charged are claiming that it was a system wide problem and their clients are not responsible because they weren’t given clear guidelines. Do you really need a guideline to know you’re not meant to beat, kick and sexually abuse a prisoner? Nevertheless, their individual guilt shouldn’t be used to absolve those higher up the system.

The commanders are responsible, right to the top of the military, right to the political leadership, the ministers and secretaries of state, whose job it was to provide clear rules, supervision, and protection, to know what was going on and to get rid of the individuals responsible. They won’t take that responsibility of their own accord; it’s left to us to persuade them.

Jo Wilding is an Iraq-based British human rights campaigner, writer and trainee lawyer from Bristol. Twenty-nine-year old Wilding first came to Iraq in August 2001 with Voices in the Wilderness. She returned to Iraq as an independent observer in February 2003, and stayed for the month before the war and the first 11 days of the bombing as a human shield, before being expelled by the Iraqi foreign ministry as part of a purge of independent foreigners.

For Those in Abu Gharib, It Was Operation Enduring Torture

Like the Wehrmacht, We've Descended into Barbarity

Racism at Core of Iraq Invasion

By Firas Al-Atraqchi, Freelance Columnist, 17/04/2004

The popular perception in the US is that Iraq is a country of uncivilized criminals and terrorists raised to hate America because common people hate freedom and liberty, ragheads and sand niggers who brought down the Twin Towers in New York City and attacked the Pentagon. US-based columnists have taken to calling Iraqis lazy and ungrateful. A few days ago, in a prime-time press conference, US President George Bush said the Iraqis must take control of their own destinies come June 30th.

The fact that many of the kidnapped foreign workers were Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and other Asians who used to drive cars and trucks should get the message across that everyone is allowed a job in Iraq - except the Iraqis. Take Coalition Provisional Authority head L. Paul Bremer who issued Order 39 (September 19), which declares that 100 percent ownership of Iraqi banks, mines and factories is allowed to be foreign-owned and 100 percent of profits from these Iraqi institutions is allowed to be moved out of the country. Where do Iraqis fit in? Is it any surprise they feel cheated and robbed? Does a robbed man stand by and watch his possessions dwindle?

This is the ignorance that is supported, endorsed, encouraged and tolerated by everyone from the Bush administration down to every major news outlet in the US .

Take for example the handling of the four Americans who were killed in Fallujah, had their corpses burned, dismembered and then hanged on a bridge. Every news outlet in the US spoke of the four heroic American "civilians." Iraqis butchered four decent, law-abiding civilians. Civilians who left their families in helping to rebuild Iraq . That is the version the American public is given.

However, the truth is that the four were former US soldiers in various capacities working as security agents for North Carolina-based Blackwater Corp, which – among other things – is charged with protecting L. Paul Bremer. Secondly, it is no secret that many of the operations the US military used to undertake have now been slated for private security firms like Blackwater. Effectively, they are hired help - mercenaries. One of them was a Navy Seal, one of the most decorated and highly-trained outfits in the US Military.

Missing from the national (and international) discussion are the reports which cited weapons found on the four slain men. Anyone who has seen news footage of the private security firms running about in Iraq will immediately recognize that they are armed to the teeth, wearing flak jackets. Initial reports said that the corpses were wearing blue-collared flak jackets.

The "civilians" theory doesn't hold much water.

In fact, and unreported to US audiences, private security firms in Iraq, much like Blackwater, are taking over major tasks and operations primarily assigned to US forces. The hope is that US forces remain in barracks, avoid improvised explosive devices and ambushes, reduce the body count, and keep the US public firmly behind the war. In effect, private security firms have become the de facto military presence in Iraq – vastly outnumbering the official count of Coalition forces.

If the US Military is considered the occupying force in Iraq and is replaced by what can be considered a mercenary force - bought and paid for to undertake military duties - then the private security firms become legitimate targets for a populace that feels itself occupied and bound to resist.

And that is precisely what several dozen clerics in Iraq and the Arab world said. They did not condemn the right to attack the four armed men - remember, they were armed - but did strongly condemn in unmistakable terms the mutilations and public hangings that occurred later. Islamic law strictly prohibits the maiming or disrespecting of any dead body, even that of an animal. According to the Prophet Mohammed, even spitting at a dead body - whether it is of an enemy or ally, Jew, Christian, or Muslim is irrelevant - is considered sacrilegious. The Prophet routinely stood up in respect as the funeral procession of Jews and Christians passed by his domicile. However, this little titbit about what is permissible and prohibited in Islam was left out of US reporting.

A full week after the killing of the four Blackwater employees, more than 700 people have been killed in Fallujah. There are more than 2,000 wounded civilians. More than 147 houses have been entirely destroyed. Four mosques have been damaged. Doctors are running out of vital supplies. The city is under siege, cut off from food, water, and medicine supplies. "We are resorting to collective punishment," Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria told Chris Matthews on Hardball recently. He denied the official US position that fighters in the "Sunni Triangle" are dead-enders. He also claimed uneven-handedness in Iraq was feeding the "insurgency."

Punitive collective punishment of this kind is reminiscent of German Nazi policies during the occupation of France . Take for example the German Nazi response in the French town of Tulle in 1944. History shows that French Resistance had seized the town of Tulle from the German 3rd Battalion and 95th Security Regiment. When the Das Reich Panzer Division retook the town, they found 64 badly-mutilated German bodies. Revenge would come swiftly: The SS-Panzer Aufklarungs Abteilung 2 platoon seized 99 men and promptly executed them, later hanging their bodies as a sign to others. Some 100 civilians who were deported to concentration camps would die in Germany .

To the Germans, the civilians were "insurgents and terrorist sympathizers"; to the rest of the world, they were civilians. For its part, the French resistance fighters were not called terrorists; they were called La Resistance (the resistance) and adopted a near mythical, if not legendary, status in European history.

As civilian casualties escalate into the hundreds, US Military commanders, hoping to save face in Iraq and the Arab World, have started to accuse the defenders of Fallujah of hiding behind women and children. That statement flies in the face of video footage shot by Al Jazeera and carried on ABC, CBS, MSNBC, and NBC clearly showing Iraqi fighters running between streets, in trenches, atop buildings, firing their RPGs and automatic weapons. No women and children in sight.

When a large convoy of aid supplies carrying blood for hospital transfusions, food, and water managed to break through a US military roadblock, the media called it a delivery of aid to Sunni rebels. Missing from the report were mentions of doctors feeling overwhelmed and ill-equipped to deal with the growing death toll and the number of civilians facing a humanitarian crisis due to lack of drinkable water and unspoiled food (Fallujah was dependent on shipments from the rest of Iraq).

On April 12, as Arab journalists (including Iraqi journalists) pressed the Coalition to comment on civilian deaths in Fallujah , US General Mark Kimmit refused to acknowledge that it was civilians who were killed. US Media swallowed it hook, line and sinker with MSNBC reporting " U.S. officials say about 700 insurgents and 70 coalition troops have been killed since April 1, but Iraqi civilian toll is unclear." Despite persistent reports from Al Jazeera and other Arab media, despite the graphic pictures of women and children cut to pieces, despite the angry wails of hospital staff and appeals for humanitarian assistance, US media is refusing to toe anything but the official government line.

Isn’t that how the fabrications, reliance on unreliable defectors, and other misconceptions about Iraq ’s WMD were propagated in the first place? What of the Iraq-Al Qaeda link, which has since been debunked? Was it not US media that reported every "official" word coming out of the Bush administration and various Washington think-tanks as gospel?

Why?

Racism is the answer. There is an arrogance in the West that everything Western is superior, exemplary and ideal for all cultures. In 2002, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Belusconi said that Islamic culture was inferior to the advanced Western civilization. This school of thought is prevalent throughout every sector of US society and has been nudged on by the various "hate-films" that Hollywood churns every year. Arabs are portrayed as stupid, animalistic, amoral, sex-starved, abusing, wife-battering terrorists who seek to kill themselves - and their children - so that they can languish with 72 virgins in heaven. That Arabs saved Western civilization by translating the Greek philosophies and complementing them, introducing algebra, geometry and astronomy to Europe is left out. That the first medical institute in world history was established in - wait for it - southern Iraq by the Muslims is also lost on the US public.

It is no surprise then when we hear that British commanders in Iraq were condemning the Americans’ heavy-handed and disproportionate military tactics in Iraq . According to The Telegraph's Sean Rayment, a British officer, "who agreed to the interview on the condition of anonymity, said that part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen - the Nazi expression for ‘sub-humans’.

"They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are. Their attitude towards the Iraqis is tragic, it's awful." The British officer accused the US Military of targeting "terrorists" even if they are located in densely-populated civilian areas: "They may well kill the terrorists in the barrage but they will also kill and maim innocent civilians. That has been their response on a number of occasions. It is trite, but American troops do shoot first and ask questions later. They are very concerned about taking casualties and have even trained their guns on British troops, which has led to some confrontations between soldiers," The Telegraph reported.

By the way, if you weren’t around during the Nazi purging of Europe ’s Jews, untermenschen is the popular term a certain Adolf Hitler used to express his disdain for what he termed the inferior Jews in Mein Kampf.

Consequently, if the US Military, which can be considered the military hand of the US government, considers Iraqis as inferior beings, it is then academic to extrapolate that US lawmakers view Iraqis as lesser peoples. Perhaps that helps explain why the Bush administration is so irked by news reports showing dead Iraqi women and children. Perhaps it helps explain why he accuses Arab media – including Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya – of being propagandists and liars. Perhaps it also explains why every Iraqi protestation in the last few years about lack of WMDs was shot down by US media and Iraqi officials were branded expert liars.

Perhaps, it also explains why "the axis of evil" slogan was so popular with Washington neocons. Inferior people are considered satanic and evil. After all, was this not how slavery was maintained and thrived in the continental US in the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries? Were not the slaves considered by white (supremacist) landowners to be cursed by God, soulless and would never see the gates of heaven? Was this not how Apartheid was allowed to survive in the heart of black Africa ?

Racism. The same racism that allowed 800,000 Rwandan Hutus and Tutsis to die exactly 10 years ago while the so-called compassionate superpower focused on twiddling their thumbs. The same racism that refused to apologize for centuries of slavery at the Durban Conferences in South Africa on September 8, 2001.

Zakaria put it best when he told Matthews how Iraqis must feel: "We lost four on our side and they lost 700. What do you think that tells them? That their lives are not nearly as important?"

Touché.

Firas Al-Atraqchi is a Canadian journalist of Iraqi heritage. Holding an MA in Journalism and Mass Communication, he has eleven years of experience covering Middle East issues, oil and gas markets, and the telecom industry.

A Failure of Leadership at The Highest Levels

USA: Pattern of Brutality and Cruelty – War Crimes at Abu Ghraib

An open letter from the Amnesty International to President George W. Bush on the question of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

George W. Bush
The President
The White House
Office of the President
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC 20500
USA

7 May 2004

Dear Mr President,

The world is watching as your administration responds to the most recent evidence of torture and degrading treatment of Iraqis at the hands of US personnel. While Amnesty International welcomes official statements that the allegations are being taken seriously, the ultimate proof of this will be in actions not words. In this regard, your government's record in the context of "war on terror" detentions gives cause for concern, as fundamental principles of law and human rights continue to be violated despite the administration's stated commitment to these principles.

Amnesty International recalls your statement on 26 June 2003, made on the occasion of the United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, in which you said that "the United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture and we are leading this fight by example". The organization urges you now to ensure that the USA fully meets its international obligations, including as a state party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to investigate all allegations of torture and ill-treatment, publish all findings, prosecute all perpetrators, compensate all victims, and prevent any future torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. We call on the USA to open the doors of its detention facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantánamo Bay, and at undisclosed locations elsewhere, to independent bodies, including visits by United Nations Special Rapporteurs.

In July 2003, Amnesty International sent your government a Memorandum on Concerns Relating to Law and Order in Iraq. The Memorandum included allegations of torture and ill-treatment of Iraqi detainees by US and Coalition forces.(1) The allegations included beatings, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, hooding, and prolonged forced standing and kneeling. We have never received a response or any indication from the administration or the Coalition Provisional Authority that an investigation took place. Likewise, we have never received a response to the Memorandum to the US Government on the rights of people in US custody in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay which we sent to you in April 2002, and which also raised concerns about questions and allegations of torture and ill-treatment.(2)

The military investigation in Iraq headed by Major General Antonio Taguba found "systemic and illegal abuse of detainees" in the Abu Ghraib facility (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility, BCCF) between August 2003 and February 2004, and concluded that soldiers had "committed egregious acts and grave breaches of international law at Abu Ghraib/BCCF and Camp Bucca, Iraq". Amnesty International is concerned that the Taguba report was not intended for public release, and that the administration's current response has only come once the report and the photographic evidence came into the public domain.

At the Department of Defence news briefing on 4 May 2004, Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld said that he was "stunned" by the allegations. In one of several statements apparently downplaying the seriousness of the allegations, however, he added that his "impression is that what has been charged so far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture". Amnesty International stresses that the "numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuse" found by the Taguba investigation constitute acts of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, in violation of international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention (Article 147, Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949) lists "torture or inhuman treatment", without distinguishing among the two in terms of gravity, among their "grave breaches". These are war crimes and are the most serious offences that every High Contracting Party to the Conventions must prevent and suppress, including by prosecuting the perpetrators. The incidents recorded in the Taguba report include:

Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet; Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees; Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time; Forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear; Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped; Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them; Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture; Writing "I am a Rapest" (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked; Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture; A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee; Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee.

Major General Taguba also found "credible" evidence that the following abuses took place:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol; Pouring cold water on naked detainees; Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; Threatening male detainees with rape; Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.

The Taguba report emphasized that the findings were "amply" supported by confessions from suspected perpetrators, statements from detainees and witnesses, as well as "extremely graphic photographic evidence".

The report found that there was a failure to establish clear training, procedures and oversight on interrogation and treatment of detainees, and "that very little instruction or training" was provided to military police personnel on the applicable rules of the Geneva Conventions.

At the 4 May Pentagon briefing to respond to the allegations, Secretary Rumsfeld maintained that "the fact is, this is an exception", and added that "there may be things that we can do that would be helpful in helping the world understand that this is an exceptional situation; it is not a pattern or a practice." Although he acknowledged that there "are allegations of abuse in various other locations", he added that "at any given time there are always allegations and charges of abuse in detention facilities" and that there "is a pattern and a practice of terrorists to allege abuse".

A pattern of abuse

During the past two years, consistent allegations of brutality and cruelty by US agents against detainees, including in Iraq and Afghanistan, have been presented by Amnesty International and others at the highest levels of the US Government, including the White House, the Department of Defence, and the Department of State.

Numerous people who have been held in the US Air Bases in Bagram and Kandahar in Afghanistan have spoken of the torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment to which they say they were subjected in US custody in Afghanistan.(3) For example, former Guantánamo detainee Wazir Mohammad recalled to Amnesty International in February 2004 his detention in US custody in Afghanistan in 2002. He spoke of the excessive and cruel use of shackles and handcuffs, sleep deprivation, and of being forced to crawl on his knees from his cell to the interrogation room, a crawl of about 10 minutes. His testimony echoes that of numerous other former detainees.

As with hundreds if not thousands of other detainees, during his whole time in Bagram and Kandahar, Wazir Mohammad was held incommunicado. He was given no opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of his detention. He had no lawyer, no access to his family, and was not brought before any court, including the "competent tribunal" envisaged by the Geneva Conventions to determine prisoner status in time of war. He never met a delegate from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) either. During more than a year in Guantánamo he says he met an ICRC delegate once, on the first day.

Last month in Yemen, Amnesty International spoke with another former Guantánamo prisoner, Walid al-Qadasi. He recalled his time in a secret detention facility in Kabul, interrogated by US agents. He said that the first night of interrogation had been coined by the prisoners as "the black night". He told Amnesty International that: "They cut our clothes with scissors, left us naked and took photos of us, before they gave us Afghan clothes to wear. They then handcuffed our hands behind our backs, blindfolded us and started interrogating us…They threatened me with death, accusing me of belonging to al-Qa'ida. They put us in an underground cell measuring approximately two metres by three metres. There were ten of us in the cell. We spent three months in the cell… During the three month period in the cell, we were not allowed outside into the open air." He alleged that the detainees were subjected to sleep deprivation, including by the use of loud music.

Incommunicado detention facilitates torture and ill-treatment. In his report to the UN Commission on Human Rights in 2004, the Special Rapporteur on torture "reiterates the recommendation of his two predecessors and urges all States to declare incommunicado detention illegal". The Special Rapporteur added that "incommunicado detention is aggravated when individuals are held in secret places of detention" and that "it should be a punishable offence for any official to hold a person in a secret and/or unofficial place of detention".

The USA cannot claim to be leading the struggle against torture by example, when the example it is setting is one of using prolonged incommunicado detention, including in undisclosed locations. Transparency, access and accountability are the most effective measures against torture and ill-treatment. The USA should employ these measures and truly lead by example.

Amnesty International has previously expressed concern about the mixed messages which the US government has sent regarding its commitment to international human rights standards. In June 2003, the administration issued a strong statement that government policy was to "comply with all of its legal obligations in its treatment of detainees, and in particular with legal obligations prohibiting torture".(4) At the same time it has failed to comply with the Geneva Conventions with regard to the Guantànamo detainees.(5) When the USA unilaterally decides whether or not to affirm the rights of individuals protected by international treaties and agreements, this may send a message to troops and others that the government is set on a course in which international agreements can be ignored or set aside at the discretion of the executive for the sake of expediency.

Intelligence and interrogation

Amnesty International has also recently spoken to a person who has worked in Guantánamo who has said that most if not all the detainees he had contact with there (approximately 40) had alleged that they were physically abused in Kandahar or Bagram. Based on this knowledge, this person expressed no surprise at the recent evidence emerging from Iraq, and stated that the abuse in Afghanistan appeared to be part of softening up detainees for interrogation and detention.

The Taguba report presents evidence that the abuse allegedly inflicted on the detainees in Iraq followed requests from military intelligence and other government interrogators that the military police (MP) guards in the prison "set physical and mental conditions for favourable interrogation of witnesses". Guards alleged that military intelligence personnel had given instructions including "loosen this guy up for us", "make sure he has a bad night"; "make sure he gets the treatment"; and "Good job, they're breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They're giving out good information, Finally, and Keep up the good work. Stuff like that."

At a Coalition Provisional Authority Briefing in Iraq on 4 May 2004, Major General Geoffrey Miller stated that while physical contact between interrogator and detainees is prohibited, "sleep deprivation and stress positions and all that could be used. But they must be authorized". The United Nations Committee against Torture, the expert body established by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has expressly held that restraining detainees in very painful positions, hooding, threats, and prolonged sleep deprivation are methods of interrogation which violate the prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Amnesty International notes that Major General Miller commanded the Guantánamo detention operation until he was recently put in charge of detainee operations in Iraq. The Taguba report notes that from "31 August to 9 September 2003, MG Miller led a team of personnel experienced in strategic interrogation to [Iraq] to review current Iraq Theatre ability to rapidly exploit internees for actionable intelligence". The Taguba report also noted that Major General Miller's team had stated that "it is essential that the guard force be actively engaged in setting the conditions for successful exploitation of the internees." It seems that the alleged torture and ill-treatment at the centre of the Taguba report began around this time.

The Taguba report holds that "Military Police should not be involved with setting "favourable conditions" for subsequent interviews. These actions…clearly run counter to the smooth operation of a detention facility."

Access for human rights monitors

The US administration has denied access to independent human rights monitors, including Amnesty International, to places of detention. We again recall your statement of 26 June 2003, promising the USA's commitment to eradicating torture, in which you said: "Notorious human rights abusers, including, among others, Burma, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, and Zimbabwe, have long sought to shield their abuses from the eyes of the world by staging elaborate deceptions and denying access to international human rights monitors." We urge you to ensure such access is granted now, to all US detention facilities.

While the International Committee of the Red Cross has had access to detainees, even this access is reported not to have been full and ongoing in some instances, including in Bagram Air Base, and at undisclosed locations elsewhere. In this regard, we are concerned by the following entry in the Taguba report:

The various detention facilities operated by the 800th MP Brigade have routinely held persons brought to them by Other Government Agencies (OGAs) without accounting for them, knowing their identities, or even the reason for their detention. The Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC) at Abu Ghraib called these detainees "ghost detainees." On at least one occasion, the 320th MP Battalion at Abu Ghraib held a handful of "ghost detainees" (6-8) for OGAs that they moved around within the facility to hide them from a visiting International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) survey team. This maneuver was deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law.

Deaths in custody

Two men who died in US custody in December 2002 in Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan had not been seen by the International Committee of the Red Cross. The official autopsies recorded the cause of their deaths as "homicide" and found "blunt force injuries" in both cases. Amnesty International was informed by Chief of Public Affairs at the US Army Criminal Investigation Command on 6 May 2004 that the investigations into their deaths are continuing but that the investigation "is close to completion". It is now 17 months since the two men died. Investigations into another dozen cases of deaths in US custody in Iraq and Afghanistan are reported to be underway.

Amnesty International repeats here one of the allegations made in the journal of Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick concerning a death in custody of an Iraqi prisoner in Abu Ghraib: "They stressed him out so bad that the man passed away. They put his body in a body bag and packed him in ice for approximately 24 hours in the shower… The next day the medics came in and put his body on a stretcher, placed a fake IV in his arm and took him away." Frederick stated that the prisoner had never been recorded in the prison system "and therefore never had a number".

We emphasise that all deaths in custody must be investigated and that the results of all these investigations must be made public. If anyone is found to have died as a result of torture, his or her dependants would be entitled to compensation, under Article 14 of the Convention against Torture. Those found responsible must be brought to justice.

Amnesty International's recommendations

Amnesty International urges the US Government to:

- investigate the allegations at Abu Ghraib prison, Iraq, and other detention facilities to establish whether war crimes have been committed and ensure accountability at the highest level;

- bring to justice those responsible for war crimes and other violations in accordance with the USA's obligations under international and US law. Such investigations should not just cover the direct perpetrators, but must include the higher chain of command responsibility;

- initiate investigations into all other allegations of abuse of detainees held in US custody in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere;

- suspend from duties any public officials involved pending the outcome of the investigation and any subsequent legal or disciplinary proceedings;

- ensure, through appropriate policies, training and oversight, that torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment will not be tolerated. All detainees in US custody must be treated humanely and in accordance with US obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law;

- launch a full investigation into interrogation practices of detainees in US custody wherever they are held around the world and make the findings public;

- prohibit all techniques during interrogations which violate the prohibition against torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. These include such techniques as holding detainees naked, making them assume painful positions, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold, and hooding;

- ensure that private contractors uphold US and international law, and that they receive adequate training on human rights practices and protections.

- end the practice of incommunicado detention. Provide immediate access to detainees to their families and lawyers, ensure regular access to the ICRC in all places of detention and access for independent human rights organizations, including representatives of Amnesty International, into detention facilities;

- invite the United Nations experts covering torture and arbitrary detention to immediately visit US detention facilities in Iraq and wherever else they may seek such a visit.

- make use of the services of the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission provided for by Article 90 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions to look into the allegations of abuse and related US investigations.

- ensure that any victims of torture or inhumane treatment receive full reparations, including compensation, as required under international law.

I trust that you will give due consideration to the concerns raised in this letter.

Yours sincerely

Irene Khan

Secretary General

cc Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld
Secretary of State Colin Powell

********

(1) http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE141572003

(2) http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510532002

(3) See USA: The threat of a bad example: Undermining international standards as "war on terror" detentions continue, AI Index: AMR 51/114/2003, August 2003, http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511142003 USA: Undermining security: Violations of human dignity, the rule of law and the National Security Strategy in "war on terror" detentions, AI Index: AMR 51/061/2004, 9 April 2004
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510612004

(4) Letter to US Senator Patrick J Leahy from William J. Haynes, dated 25 June 2003

(5) Amnesty International and others, including the ICRC, have repeatedly expressed concern that none of the detainees has been brought before a "competent tribunal" to determine his status, as required by Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention.

Iraq

One year on the human rights situation remains dire

Amnesty International Statement one year after the launch of the war on Iraq18 March 2004

Introduction

A year after US-led forces launched war on Iraq, the promise of improved human rights for Iraqis remains far from realized. Most Iraqis still feel unsafe in a country ravaged by violence.

Every day Iraqis face threats to their lives and security. Violence is endemic, whether in the form of attacks by armed groups, abuses by the occupying forces, or violence against women. Millions of people have suffered the consequences of destroyed or looted infrastructure, mass unemployment and uncertainty about their future. And there is little or no confidence that those responsible for past and present human rights abuses will be brought to justice.

There have been some welcome positive developments in the country, especially in the field of freedom of expression, association and assembly. Dozens of non-government organizations (NGOs), including organizations focusing on women's rights, have been established, more than 80 daily and weekly newspapers are published and scores of political parties and religious organizations have emerged.

The people of Iraq, however, urgently need stability, security and peace, not more bloodshed. Their future must be based on justice and the rule of law. This report, published a year after the war began, outlines some of the major human rights concerns that must be addressed if such a future is to be secured.

Background
Before the war began on 20 March 2003, Amnesty International (AI) warned that military action would mean further suffering for a people who had already suffered terribly as a result of government repression and the devastating effects of economic sanctions. Some of AI's fears were borne out. Hundreds of Iraqi civilians were killed and injured during the war, some as a result of cluster bombs dropped by Coalition Forces. Homes and vital institutions were destroyed, and whole communities were cut off from electricity and water supplies.

By early April, US forces controlled Baghdad and UK forces controlled southern Iraq. On 1 May, US President George W. Bush declared the main combat operations over and soon after Paul Bremer, a former US diplomat, had been appointed as US Administrator for Iraq and Head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). Iraq was a defeated and occupied country.

On 24 April, AI delegates arrived in Basra – the first time in 20 years that the organization had been able to visit Iraq. The overriding concern of everyone they met was the growing insecurity and violence. Basra was a city ravaged by looting and lawlessness, a city where women and girls were too frightened to go out alone for fear of rape, abduction and other violence.

Across Iraq, disorder, fear and insecurity prevailed. In most places, US and UK troops stood by as government buildings, offices, universities, schools, hospitals, museums, libraries and warehouses were ransacked and demolished. Countless documents vital to the future of Iraqis were burned or otherwise destroyed.

The Coalition Forces had removed the previous government's authority, but had demonstrably failed to provide the protection and assistance they were obliged to give the people whose land they were occupying. Under international humanitarian law, as occupying powers it was their duty to maintain and restore public order, and provide food, medical care and relief assistance. They failed in this duty, with the result that millions of Iraqis faced grave threats to their health and safety.

The problem of insecurity was heightened by the lack of appropriate policing and the wide availability of arms. An increase in serious abuses against women, including rape and murder, was reported, and scores of former Ba'ath Party and security force members were targeted in revenge attacks, particularly in the Shi'a dominated districts of Baghdad and in southern Iraq.

In July the CPA appointed a 25-member Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) from the various religious and ethnic groups. The Council had some executive powers, but Paul Bremer retained power to overrule or veto its decisions. In early September the IGC appointed an Iraqi interim government. The CPA and IGC agreed in November on a power transfer to an interim Iraqi government on 30 June 2004 and on 8 March 2004 the IGC signed an interim Constitution.

In the meantime, new Iraqi human rights non-governmental organizations, including women's groups, had begun to emerge and started work on a wide range of human rights activities, including documenting past and recent violations. New political parties and media outlets also emerged, and people freely organized demonstrations for the first time in decades to express their grievances. Reforms to the law introduced by the new authorities removed the shadow of the death penalty and closed down courts that had been a mockery to justice.

However, the positive developments, along with almost everything else, were constantly threatened by the mounting insecurity. AI repeatedly called on the occupying forces, as a matter of urgency, to enforce law and order until Iraqi police forces could operate effectively, and expedite the creation of an Iraqi police force.

Some progress in this direction has been made since the early months of the occupation, particularly in the south of Iraq. Iraqis interviewed by AI delegates in February and March 2004 in Basra and Amara, the two governorates under the control of British troops, said the general situation had improved, although lack of security was still a major concern. Members of religious minorities, such as Sunni Muslims, Christians and Sabean/Mandeans, felt they were being targeted for attacks and other abuses.

Elsewhere in Iraq, however, violence and insecurity continue to dominate daily life. Attacks on Iraqi police stations and Coalition Forces have steadily mounted. Most have taken place in central and northern Iraq, as well as in Baghdad, and have resulted in hundreds of deaths, mostly of Iraqis but also of US and other nationals.

As the first anniversary of the war approached, such attacks appeared to be intensifying. On 3 February US Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt said that there were an average of 23 engagements a day between US soldiers and "Iraqi insurgents", compared with 18 the week before.(1)

In response, Coalition Forces appear in many cases to be using the climate of violence to justify violating the very human rights standards they are supposed to be upholding. They have shot Iraqis dead during demonstrations. They have tortured and ill-treated prisoners and detainees. They have arrested people arbitrarily and held them indefinitely without charge and without access to a lawyer. They have demolished houses and other property in acts of revenge and collective punishment. And they are operating in a legal framework that offers no mechanism in Iraq for bringing members of the Coalition Forces to justice for such acts.

Killings of civilians

More than 10,000 Iraqi civilians are thought to have been killed since 20 March 2003 as a direct result of the military intervention in Iraq, either during the war or in violent incidents during the subsequent occupation. The number is an estimate - no one in authority in Iraq is willing or able to catalogue the killings. "We don't have the capacity to track all civilian casualties", admitted US Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt in February 2004.(2) A different attitude has been shown towards non-Iraqi civilians and soldiers who have been killed.

A year after the war began, Iraqi civilians are still being killed every day. The worst incidents receive some international coverage, but many killings simply go unreported. Often, the assailants are unknown. On 4 March 2004 an AFP journalist witnessed three Iraqi civilians being killed when a missile hit their car and exploded near a US military base in southwest Baghdad. Neither the journalist nor the Iraqi police could find out who fired the rocket, and the names of the victims were not published.(3)

Killings by Coalition Forces

Scores of civilians have been killed apparently as a result of excessive use of force by US troops or have been shot dead in disputed circumstances.

For example, US soldiers have shot and killed scores of Iraqi demonstrators in several incidents, including seven in Mosul on 15 April 2003, at least 15 in Falluja on 29 April and at least two outside the Republican Palace in Baghdad on 18 June.

In November 2003 the US military said it had paid out US $1.5 million to Iraqi civilians to settle claims by victims or relatives of victims for personal injury, death or damage to property. Some of the 10,402 claims reportedly filed concerned incidents in which US soldiers had shot dead or seriously wounded Iraqi civilians with no apparent cause.(4)

Beyond such payments, however, there has been little recourse for the families of the dead and injured. No US soldier has been prosecuted for illegally killing an Iraqi civilian. Iraqi courts, because of an order issued by the US-led authority in Baghdad in June, are forbidden from hearing cases against US soldiers or any other foreign troops or foreign officials in Iraq. In effect, US soldiers are operating with total impunity.

The following are just a few cases that have been monitored by AI.

· On 14 May, two US armed vehicles broke through the perimeter wall of the home of Sa'adi Suleiman Ibrahim al-'Ubaydi in Ramadi. Soldiers beat him with rifle butts and then shot him dead as he tried to flee.

· US forces shot 12-year-old Mohammad al-Kubaisi as they carried out search operations around his house in the Hay al-Jihad area in Baghdad on 26 June. He was carrying the family bedding to the roof of his house when he was shot. Neighbours tried to rush him by car to the nearby hospital, but US soldiers stopped them. By the time they got back home, Mohammad al-Kubaisi was dead. CPA officials told AI delegates in July that Mohammad al-Kubaisi was carrying a gun when he was killed.

· On 17 September a 14-year-old boy was killed and six people were injured when US troops opened fire at a wedding party in Fallujah. The soldiers reportedly believed they were under attack when shots were fired in the air in celebration.

· On 23 September, three farmers, 'Ali Khalaf, Sa'adi Faqri and Salem Khalil, were killed and three others injured when US troops opened a barrage of gunfire reportedly lasting for at least an hour in the village of al-Jisr near Fallujah. A US military official stated that the troops came under attack but this was vehemently denied by relatives of the dead. Later that day, US military officials reportedly went to the farmhouse, took photographs and apologized to the family.
AI has also documented numerous cases where British soldiers have resorted to lethal force and killed Iraqi civilians even though their lives and the lives of others did not appear to be in danger. In some of these cases, no investigation has been carried out. In others, the investigation appeared to be inadequate. Families of victims killed by the British Army are usually given no information or inadequate information about the mechanisms and procedures for investigations and compensation.

· Walid Fayay Mazban, a driver aged 42, was shot dead by British soldiers on 24 August at a junction near the Apache Military Camp in circumstances indicating that no lives were in danger. Soldiers had set up a temporary checkpoint at the junction, but street lights were not working so the whole area was dark. When Walid Fayay Mazban failed to stop at the checkpoint, he was shot several times in his back by a British soldier. Soldiers found nothing of suspicion in his car. In September the British Army paid around US$1,500 to his family on humanitarian grounds. The Royal Military Police launched an investigation into the killing, but Walid Fayay Mazban's family have been provided with no information on the progress of the investigation.

AI has repeatedly called for all killings of civilians by Coalition Forces to be thoroughly, independently and impartially investigated and for perpetrators of unlawful killings to be brought to justice. To date, no independent investigations are known to have been held.

Killings by armed individuals

On 2 March 2004, bombs exploded in a Shi'a mosque in the Kadhimiya neighbourhood of Baghdad and in the Shi'a holy city of Karbala within seconds of each other, killing around 170 civilians and injuring 500, almost all of them Shi'a Muslims. The attacks appeared to have been carefully planned: a combination of suicide bombs, planted explosives and possibly mortar fire.(5)

A month earlier, 101 people died as two suicide bomb attacks ripped apart the offices of Kurdish political parties in the northern city of Arbil.

These bombings were just two of the more recent attacks, apparently carried out by armed groups, that have been a growing feature of life in Iraq since the occupation began. The attacks have targeted the US military, Iraqi security personnel, Iraqi-controlled police stations, religious leaders and buildings, media workers, non-governmental organizations and UN agencies. They have resulted in the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of civilians.

Many other civilians have been killed by shooting - either targeted for assassination or shot dead by stray bullets. In Basra, for example, such victims have included former Ba'ath Party members and security or government officials, as well as people suspected of selling or drinking alcohol. Some of these killings appear to have been acts of revenge carried out by individuals. Many, however, appear to have been organized, reportedly by armed Islamist groups. The head of one police station in Basra openly endorsed revenge killings, telling an AI delegate that families of victims of past abuses "were in the right" for avenging the deaths of relatives by the previous government.

AI has called on armed groups to end the policy of attacking civilians and members of international humanitarian agencies. It has also called on those responsible for such crimes to be brought to justice and tried according to international human rights standards.

The following list highlights a few attacks. In not one of these cases have the perpetrators been brought to justice.

· On 7 August 2003, 17 people were killed when a truck exploded outside Jordanian embassy in Baghdad.
· On 19 August, 22 people were killed, including UN envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, by truck bomb on the UN headquarters in Baghdad.
· On 29 August: 83 people were killed, including Shi'a leader Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer al-Hakim, by a car bomb at the Imam Ali mosque in Najaf.
· On 27 October, 35 people were killed in four bomb attacks in Baghdad targeting the Red Cross and police stations.
· On 18 January 2004, 25 people were killed, most of them Iraqi civilians, in a car bomb attack outside US headquarters in Baghdad.

Administration of justice

On 12 December, 65-year-old Amal Salim Madi, whose three sons were arrested in October, joined a demonstration in Baghdad demanding rights for prisoners. She said, "The Americans said they were taking [my sons] off for an hour of questioning. We have not seen them since." (6)

Her sons are among the new generation of missing people in Iraq. They are not ending up in mass graves, as many did under the former Iraqi government, but they are lost to their families - held somewhere in the system of detention centres being run by the occupying forces in Iraq. Adil Allami, a lawyer with the Human Rights Organization of Iraq, said in October 2003: "Iraq has turned into one big Guantanamo", referring to the US military prison in Cuba where hundreds of individuals suspected of "terrorist" acts remain held without charge.(7)

Ever since the war began, AI has been receiving reports of Iraqis who have been taken into detention by Coalition Forces and whose rights have been violated. Many have been held without charge for weeks or months. Some have been tortured and ill-treated. Virtually none has had prompt access to a lawyer, their family or judicial review of their detention.

Such abuses in the administration of justice have been facilitated by the general breakdown in law and order, but also by inconsistent application of international standards by the occupying forces.

After taking power, the CPA reviewed the Iraqi Penal Code of 1969 and the Criminal Procedure Code of 1971 to evaluate their compatibility with international human rights standards. It also introduced legal amendments; these entered into force prior to their publication in Arabic in the Official Gazette, in contravention of Article 65 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The amendments did, nevertheless, include some welcome reforms. Section 9 of CPA Memorandum No. 7 prohibited the use of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Revolutionary, Special and National Security Courts, which had conducted grossly unfair trials, were abolished.

In June 2003, the CPA issued Order No.13, establishing the Central Criminal Court of Iraq. The court applies Iraqi law and has jurisdiction over crimes committed in Iraq since 19 March 2003, including crimes against the Coalition forces. In November 2003 the court sentenced the former governor of Najaf to 14 years' imprisonment for "illegal arrest, destruction of a government document and misuse of office." The court has also looked at at least two other cases involving smuggling. Amnesty International has not been able to attend trial proceedings of this court, but the organization remains concerned that Order No.13 imposed the sweeping condition that judges appointed to the court should not have been involved in Ba'ath Party activity. It is also concerned that those selected are appointed for a one-year term by the Administrator of the CPA. Such conditions appear to violate the principle of judicial independence.

Section 2(3) of CPA Memorandum No. 3 removed the jurisdiction of Iraqi courts over any Coalition personnel in both civil and criminal matters, resulting in a lack of accountability for such personnel. There are no proper mechanisms to ensure competent, impartial investigations into allegations of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by the CPA or Coalition Forces.

Incommunicado and unlawful detention

The massive Abu Ghraib prison on the southwest edge of Baghdad was the most feared detention centre under the former Iraqi government. Today the building officially goes by the name of Baghdad Correctional Facility, but little else has changed. Relatives of those held inside still wait outside for news of their loved ones, and lawyers are still turned away. One father was told to come back in four months when he tried to visit his son in November. "My son has already been in there for four months and he has been charged with nothing", he told a member of International Occupation Watch Centre.(8)

The CPA published a list of 8,500 detainees on the Internet. Most are being held indefinitely and without charge as "suspected terrorists" or "security" detainees.(9) Families waiting outside Abu Ghraib prison say most of their relatives were picked up in indiscriminate raids.

Many Iraqis do not know where their relatives are being held and the majority have no access to the Internet to seek information about them. Some of those arrested are taken to jails run by Iraqi police, others are taken to US-run centres - but often no one seems to have the relevant information. Those in Iraqi jails usually have access to lawyers and judges at some point. Many of those held in prisons and detention centres run by the Coalition Forces - such as Camp Cropper in Baghdad International Airport (which closed in October), Abu Ghraib Prison and the detention centres in Habbaniya Airport and Um Qasr - have invariably been denied access to family or lawyers and any form of judicial review of their detention. Some have been held for weeks or months; others are apparently being held beyond the prescribed 90 days for judicial review. AI has also investigated cases in which Coalition Forces have failed to implement promptly rulings by judges to release suspects.

In effect, there is a two-tier system whereby people detained by the Coalition Forces have fewer safeguards than those held by Iraqi officials. For example, those detained by Coalition Forces can be held for 90 days before being brought before a judge (according to CPA Memorandum No. 3), whereas those detained within the framework of the Iraqi Code of Criminal Procedure must have their case reviewed within 24 hours.

Conditions in many of the detention centres are harsh. There have been many unconfirmed reports of hunger strikes and revolts in prisons. The CPA acknowledged that three prisoners were killed and eight wounded during an uprising in Abu Ghraib prison on 24 November.

In Basra, scores of people remain held without charge or trial in the British-controlled al-Shu'aiba detention centre near al-Zubair. Some were held in Um Qasr before being transferred. Also in Basra, armed Islamist groups have been involved in the arrest, detention and torture of people whom they suspect of "immoral" activities such as selling alcohol, videos or CDs.

· Qays Mohammad Abd al-Karim al-Salman, a businessman with Danish citizenship, returned to Iraq 10 days before his arrest by the US army on 6 May. He alleged he was forced to lie down on the road, then taken to the Holding Centre at Baghdad Airport where he was held for 33 days on suspicion of murder before being released without charge. He was denied contact with the outside world and ill-treated.

· Zakariya Zakher Sa'ad, aged 55, an Egyptian nightwatchman for the Russian Consul in Baghdad, was arrested by US soldiers investigating an attempted theft at the Consulate. Neighbours tried to tell the soldiers that he was the guard, not the thief, but the soldiers would not listen. The soldiers threw Zakariya Zakher Sa'ad to the ground, tied him and took him away. Until July 2003 he had been held at Camp Cropper, although his family had not been able to see him to confirm his whereabouts. Amnesty International does not have any information as to whether he is still detained or not.

· Humam 'Abd al-Khaleq 'Abd al-Ghaffur, a nuclear physicist, was arrested in his home in Baghdad on 20 April 2003. His whereabouts remain unknown.

· Hussain al-Haery, a professor at Baghdad University, was arrested at his house in early July 2003. He is currently held in Abu Ghraib.

· Sa'doun Hamadi, the former parliament speaker, was arrested on 29 May 2003 and detained without charge or trial for nearly nine months before his release on 14 February. He was held in three different places, Camp Cropper at Baghdad International Airport, Um Qasr and then Abu Ghraib Prison. On his release US authorities stated that there was no security justification for his detention.

AI has written to the CPA asking for clarification on the reasons for the continued detention and legal status of a number of people, including scientists, former diplomats and civil servants. It has yet to receive a response.

Torture and ill-treatment

Abdallah Khudhran al-Shamran, a Saudi Arabian national, was arrested in al-Rutba in early April 2003 by US and allied Iraqi forces while travelling from Syria to Baghdad. On reaching an unknown site, he said he was beaten, given electric shocks, suspended by his legs, had his penis tied and was subjected to sleep deprivation. He was held there for four days before being transferred to a camp hospital in Um Qasr. He was then interrogated and released without money or passport. He approached a British soldier, whereupon he was taken to another place of detention, then transferred to a military field hospital and again interrogated and tortured. This time torture methods reportedly included prolonged exposure in the sun, being locked in a container, and being threatened with execution.

Such reports of torture or other ill-treatment by Coalition Forces have been frequent in the past year. In the first weeks of the war and occupation, detainees suffered extreme heat while housed in tents and were supplied with insufficient water, inadequate washing facilities, open trenches for toilets, no change of clothes, and no books, newspapers, radios or writing materials. Since then, detainees have reported being routinely subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during arrest and the first 24 hours of detention. Plastic handcuffs used by US troops have caused detainees unnecessary pain. Former detainees have said they were forced to lie face down on the ground, were held handcuffed, hooded or blindfolded, and were not given water or food or allowed to go to the toilet.

Many detainees have alleged they were tortured and ill-treated by US and UK troops during interrogation. Methods often reported include prolonged sleep deprivation; beatings; prolonged restraint in painful positions, sometimes combined with exposure to loud music; prolonged hooding; and exposure to bright lights. Virtually none of the allegations of torture or ill-treatment has been adequately investigated.

In Basra, at least four people have died in British custody. In one case, the cause of death was torture. Several people interviewed by AI described being tortured by British soldiers during interrogation.

· Eight Iraqis arrested on 14 September by British soldiers from the British military base Camp Steven in Basra were reportedly tortured. The men all worked for a hotel in Basra where weapons were reported to have been found. Baha' al-Maliki, the hotel's receptionist, died in custody three days later; his body was reportedly severely bruised and covered in blood. Kefah Taha was admitted to hospital in critical condition, suffering renal failure and severe bruising.

· In February 2004, during a hearing into the death in June 2003 of Najem Sa'doun Hattab at Camp Whitehorse detention centre near Nassiriya, a former US marine testified that it was common practice to kick and punch prisoners who did not cooperate - and even some who did. The marine had been granted immunity from prosecution for his testimony. Najem Sa'doun Hattab, a former Ba'ath Party official, died after he was beaten and choked by a US marine reservist.(10)

House demolitions and searches

On 10 November 2003, US soldiers arrived at the farmhouse of the Najim family near the town of al-Mahmudiya, south of Baghdad. They ordered everyone who lived there to leave within 30 minutes. Soon afterwards, two F-16 warplanes bombed and destroyed the farmhouse.

The demolition was apparently in retaliation for an attack on a US convoy a few days earlier. Soon after the attack, US soldiers had arrested six men outside the Najim house reportedly after weapons were found there. The destruction of the Najim home was just one of several similar retaliatory house demolitions that have been reported. Such acts - reprisals against people or their property, and collective punishments – are clearly prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

AI has learned of at least 15 other houses that have been destroyed by US forces since November during military operations in Tikrit. In one case, a family in al-Haweda village was given just five minutes to leave their house before it was razed to the ground by US tanks and helicopter fire.

Major Lou Zeisman, a US military official from the 82nd Airborne Division, reportedly said: "If you shoot at an American or Coalition force member, you are going to be killed or you are going to be captured, and if we trace somebody back to a specific safe house, we are going to destroy that facility..."(11)

AI also continues to receive many reports of members of the Coalition Forces damaging and destroying property without justification during house searches. Soldiers have smashed their way into cars, houses and cupboards after the owners have offered keys and begged that they be used. In numerous cases, property and large sums of money have been "confiscated" during an arrest and not returned when the person is released.

In one case, US officers accepted that there was evidence that a crime had been committed by officers who took more than three million dinars (US$2,000) from a family's home. They added, however, that redress would be long and difficult as they lacked the means to investigate.

Victims of lawlessness

A sudden barrage of shooting rang out in the bustling Old Basra Street on 15 February 2004. When it finished, at least nine people were dead - the latest victims of attacks on suspected alcohol vendors in Basra. The attackers were unknown, but widely suspected to be members of Shi'a armed political groups which have appeared after the war. A frightened salesman, Tarik Mahmoud, said: "There are no laws to protect me, and even if a law existed, I would still be afraid because people are used to killing each other."(12)

The lack of law and order continues to be a major concern in many areas of Iraq. AI delegates witnessed firsthand the devastating impact the lawlessness is having on the lives of ordinary Iraqis, whether it be looting, revenge killings, kidnappings or violent sexual crimes.

Violence against women

In the aftermath of war, women and girls have increasingly faced violent attacks, including abduction, rape and murder, as a result of the breakdown of law and order. Many women were too afraid to leave their homes, and girls were being kept away from school. Women who have been victims of violence in the street or home have virtually no hope of obtaining justice.

In May 2003, for example, Asma, a young engineer, was abducted in Baghdad. She was shopping with her mother, sister and a male relative when six armed men started shooting around them. Asma was forced into a car and driven to a farmhouse outside Baghdad, where she was said to have been repeatedly raped. A day later she was driven back to her parents' neighbourhood and pushed out of the car.

In Basra, women and girls not wearing the hijab have been threatened by Islamist groups and now almost all cover themselves.

Samira Abd al-Munim, who works in Basra's teaching hospital, told AI delegates in May: "Because of the insecurity, my life is extremely limited. I cannot visit my family or go to the market without the company of my husband... I don't dare walk on my own as I used to... My children are almost imprisoned in the house for their safety."

In some cases women who have been campaigning to protect women's rights have been threatened. Yanar Mohammed, a member of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, has reportedly received several death threats, including one by email from an Islamist group known as the Army of Sahaba. When she asked CPA officials for protection, she was allegedly told there were more urgent matters to attend to. A number of women working for the CPA have been killed. AI is not aware of any steps that have been taken by the CPA or IGC to ensure adequate protection of women's human rights and women activists.

Accountability for past violations

Ensuring justice is fundamental for the countless victims of human rights violations in Iraq. They have suffered decades of grave violations by Iraqi government agents as well as abuses committed during the course of several conflicts, including the recent war and its aftermath.

To date, little action has been taken to address past human rights violations, including mass "disappearances", or to investigate and bring to justice those found responsible for committing crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes, or to provide compensation and restitution to victims. In December the Iraqi Governing Council established the statute of the Iraqi Special Tribunal in order to try Saddam Hussain and other former Iraqi officials, as well as a Committee on Truth and Reconciliation. However, it remains to be seen whether these will be effective and will help to gain justice for victims in accordance with international standards.

In order to be fair and effective, all measures aimed at obtaining justice must conform to international human rights and standards. Neither victims nor suspected perpetrators of abuses should receive second class justice.

In relation to former Iraqi government officials, AI has continued to stress the need for ensuring fairness. Any tribunal must be competent, impartial and independent, and suspects must be pursued solely on the basis of the evidence against them and through a fair process. There should be no statute of limitations and no amnesties, pardons or similar measures for crimes under international law if such measures would prevent a conclusive verdict and full reparations for victims. There should be the right to appeal and no recourse to the death penalty or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment. Victims and their families must have effective means to obtain full reparation for the violations they have suffered.

AI has recommended that Iraqi judicial experts work with international experts to assess the Iraqi judicial system, including its capacity to ensure fair trials, and explore options for bring perpetrators of abuse to justice.

Conclusion and recommendations

After a year of war, lawlessness, spiralling violence and economic hardship, Iraqis face an uncertain future. For the next year to be better than the last, the occupying forces, the Iraqi Governing Council, the next Iraqi interim administration and the international community must make a real commitment to protecting and promoting the full range of human rights.

Fundamental changes to Iraq's legal, judicial and penal systems are needed. Human rights must be at the centre of all efforts to rebuild and reconstruct Iraq. A failure to fully protect human rights in the process of change would be a betrayal of the Iraqi people, who have suffered so much in the past.

AI calls on the Coalition Provisional Authority, the Coalition Forces and the Iraqi Governing Council to:

· Ensure that soldiers fully abide by law enforcement standards and use force in line with the principles of necessity and proportionality. In particular, they should use firearms only if lives are in danger and there is no other means to respond to that danger.

· Ensure that Iraqi police replace soldiers for law enforcement duties as soon as possible provided they are given appropriate equipment and training, including on international standards for law enforcement.

· Provide a unified legal system whereby all criminal suspects are treated in the same way and afforded all safeguards provided for in international law. The rights of all suspects must be fully respected regardless of which authority is responsible for holding them.

· Clarify without delay the fate and whereabouts of everyone held in custody.

· Amend CPA Memorandum No. 3 to ensure that all criminal suspects can be brought before a judicial authority promptly after arrest and have the lawfulness and necessity of their detention reviewed. The Memorandum should also be amended to ensure detainees have a right to prompt access to a lawyer and that their families are promptly notified of the detention.

· Clarify and make public the disciplinary and criminal mechanisms of accountability for the CPA and Coalition Forces.

· Ensure that the prohibition of torture and any other form of ill-treatment is absolutely respected by Coalition Forces, Iraqi police and any other forces involved in detaining suspects.

· Ensure that all investigations into alleged abuses by Coalition Forces are conducted by a body that is competent, impartial and independent, and seen to be so, and that any findings of such investigations are made public.

· Provide reparations, including compensation to the victims or to their families.

· Improve conditions of detention so that they comply fully with the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.

· Immediately stop any policy of unlawful destruction of property and collective punishment, and make clear to all US forces that such actions are prohibited. All families whose houses or other property have been destroyed in such actions should be fully compensated.

********

(1) AP, 3 February 2004

(2) Reuters 12 Feb 2004

(3) AFP 4 March 2004

(4) Guardian, 26 November 2003

(5) AFP and Reuters 4 March 2004

(6) AFP, 12 December 2003

(7) agency/date not clear

(8) Searching for Yunis - and how many others? International Occupation Watch Centre, David Enders, 28 November 2003.

(9) Searching for Yunis - and how many others? International Occupation Watch Centre, David Enders, 28 November 2003.

(10) Union-Tribune, 3 February 2004, by Rick Rogers

(11) LA Times, 12 November 2003

(12) International Press, Edward Wong, 19 February 2004

FAQs of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)

6-05-2004 What is the ICRC's position on the reported abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US and UK forces?

The ICRC is profoundly concerned over any practice that humiliates and degrades detainees; its work in places of detention in Iraq and around the world aims precisely at preventing abuses that violate international law.

ICRC delegates regularly visit Abu Ghraib and other places of detention in Iraq (including those under the responsibility of UK forces). At Abu Ghraib visits have taken place about every 5-6 weeks since late last year when the US began to intern Iraqis and other nationals at the prison.

In Iraq, as elsewhere, ICRC delegates speak with the detainees in private to monitor their treatment. Following its visits, the ICRC conveys its findings and recommendations to the detaining authorities by making an immediate report to the authorities on the spot and then presenting its findings and recommendations in writing to their superiors.

In these reports – which are confidential so as to prevent humanitarian issues from becoming politicised – the ICRC requests that appropriate action be taken, where necessary, to stop the mistreatment of prisoners or to improve their conditions.

In the specific case of Abu Ghraib, the ICRC has - to the best of its knowledge - been granted unimpeded access to all detainees and all sections of the prison since last year. The ICRC, aware of the situation in Abu Ghraib, and on the basis of its findings, has repeatedly requested the US authorities to take corrective action.

Along with other legal norms, international humanitarian law prohibits torture and mistreatment at any time, irrespective of the status of the person detained. Reports of such acts must be properly investigated and perpetrators brought to justice. Detaining authorities are also duty bound to take all necessary measures to prevent any such abuses happening or recurring.

15-04-2003 What are some of the specific legal aspects of occupation?

When a territory is placed under the authority of a hostile army, the rules of international humanitarian law dealing with occupation apply. Occupation confers certain rights and obligations on the occupying power.

The rules of international humanitarian law apply whenever a territory comes under enemy control during an armed conflict.

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations states that a "territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised." While the Geneva Conventions do not define occupation, the Fourth Convention nevertheless contains provisions applicable in occupied territories.

Since occupation does not imply sovereignty over a territory, the occupying power may not alter the legal status of protected persons. Occupation confers certain rights and obligations on the occupying power.

The duties of the occupying power include restoring and ensuring, as far as possible, public order and safety; providing the population with food and medical supplies; agreeing to relief schemes undertaken by other States or impartial humanitarian organizations if the population is inadequately supplied; maintaining medical facilities and services; ensuring public health and hygiene; and facilitating the work of educational institutions.

The occupying power must uphold the criminal laws of the occupied territory and may suspend them only when they constitute a threat to the occupying power or an obstacle to the application of international humanitarian law. Should legal proceedings be instituted against protected persons, the occupying power must respect all judicial guarantees and ensure a regular trial for such persons.

Prohibited actions include forcibly transferring protected persons from the occupied territories to the territory of the occupying power; compelling protected persons to serve in the armed forces of the occupying power; and looting.

7-10-2003 Iraq: ICRC continues to visit places of detention

Operational update Relentless violence, tensions and uncertainty in Iraq have made the humanitarian mission ever more difficult to carry out. But despite the challenges, the ICRC and its partners are still doing a lot.

The prevailing insecurity in Iraq has obliged humanitarian organisations, including the ICRC, to adapt their way of helping the population. The ICRC currently focuses on activities for which it has a specific mandate under international humanitarian law – such as visits to persons deprived of their freedom – and on emergency support for the water and sanitation and medical sectors.

The organisation also continues to cooperate with its local partner, the Iraqi Red Crescent Society (IRCS), and seeks to strengthen the society by providing finance and training.

Even though some staff have had to be withdrawn because of the security situation, the ICRC continues to operate in Iraq with a core team of expatriates and Iraqi staff based in offices across the country.

Reacting to emergencies

"We have had to adjust our way of working to take account of the risks", says Georges Comninos, who oversees the ICRC's Iraq operation at headquarters in Geneva. "However, we are still doing a lot. We also try to closely monitor the humanitarian situation so that we can react quickly to any major emergencies such as the devastating bomb attack on a mosque in Najaf in late August."

The ICRC carries out regular visits to places of detention in Iraq including different facilities under the control of the Occupying Powers. All the people detained at these facilities - whether they are prisoners of war, civilian internees, security internees or suspected of common law offences – are protected by the Third or Fourth Geneva Conventions that include the right to ICRC visits.

The ICRC's main objective is to monitor the conditions of detention – factors such as accommodation, medical care, food, water and sanitation – and the treatment of detainees by the authorities in charge. The ICRC has registered thousands of detainees to be able to monitor their condition.

Anxious families

Many families of detainees in Iraq face the anguish of not knowing what happened to their relatives. Through the work of the ICRC families are informed of their detained relatives' whereabouts and given the possibility to restore contacts by sending a Red Cross Message.

"This is extremely important for the families", says Georges Comninos. "Often they don't even know that their relative was detained. This causes a lot of anxiety for the families who desperately try to find out what happened to their loved ones."

Since March 2003, more than 10,000 such messages have been exchanged between detainees and their families. During two visits to detention places in late September alone nearly 1,300 Red Cross Messages were collected from detainees and several hundred distributed to them.

In total, Iraqis have sent and received more than 21,000 Red Cross Messages since March 2003. These messages are distributed and collected with the help of the Iraqi Red Crescent Society.

Rules applicable in Occupied Territory

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations states that a "territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army." The rules of occupation are complemented and developed in the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 relative to the protection of civilian persons.

The duties of the Occupying Power include restoring and ensuring, as far as possible, public order and safety; providing the population with food and medical supplies; maintaining medical facilities and services; ensuring public health and hygiene; and facilitating the work of educational institutions. The Occupying Power should also allow and facilitate relief programmes undertaken by other states or impartial humanitarian organizations if the population is inadequately supplied.

The ICRC regularly reminds the Occupying Powers in Iraq of their obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Torture At Abu Ghraib

Torture At Abu Ghraib

Furious Iraqis Wait at the Gates of Abu Ghraib

Not From Them

An Activist in Iraq The Not-Quite News About Prisons

For Those in Abu Gharib, It Was Operation Enduring Torture

Like the Wehrmacht, We've Descended into Barbarity

Racism at Core of Iraq Invasion

A Failure of Leadership at The Highest Levels

USA: Pattern of Brutality and Cruelty – War Crimes at Abu Ghraib

An open letter from the Amnesty International to President George W. Bush on the question of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

Iraq

FAQs of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)

For Your Information

An Activist in Iraq
The Not-Quite News About Prisons