Name

nInstitution

nCourse

nDate

nCIAs Enhanced Interrogation Technique Program: Are they Legal?

nIntroduction

nThe Central Intelligence Agency program has come under immense criticism because of its interrogation program. In this regard, many think that this is illegal and does respect the human rights. The Enhanced Interrogation Technique was introduced after 9/11 attack in order to gain crucial information on terrorism (Perrigo and Whitman, 14). Reports indicate that interrogation techniques applied are harsh and inhumane. Some of techniques that were introduced by Central Intelligence Service involved simulated drowning (waterboarding), cold subjection, confinement in a box and sleep deprivation (Feinstein, 56).

nGeneva Conventions

nThe “enhanced interrogation techniques” are against the Geneva Convention because they classify the suspects as detainees. In this respect, the suspects are not protected under the Geneva conventions. Furthermore, the Geneva Convention outlaws any state from incarcerating persons in special prisons. According to Article III of Geneva Conventions all members of an armed forces who are detained, sick or wounded should be at all times be treated humanely (Feinstein, 56). In addition, they should not be discriminated based on their sex, faith, religion or race. Most importantly, Article III of the Geneva Convention prohibits acts that lead to torture, cruel treatment, mutilation, murder or violence subjected to members of armed forces who are under detention (Ingelse, 59). Moreover, the Geneva Convention does not allow degrading and humiliating treatment or actions that reduce his or her dignity. The article also does not allow extrajudicial punishments i.e. punishments that are carried out without prior judgements from a court of law (Perrigo and Whitman, 34).

nThe main aim of the establishing the “enhanced interrogation techniques was to prevent any other form of threat that could cause substantial physical threat to human life in the U.S. furthermore, the Geneva Convention does not allow war prisoners to be subjected to inhumane treatment (Schafer and Navarro, 11). However, the CIA did not consider this law but instead subjected al-Qaeda and Taliban detainees to mistreatments such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation and confinement in a box. The Bush administration for instance, released a memo stating that not all Taliban and al-qaeda detainees would be covered under Geneva Convention (Holtzman and Cooper, 61). Therefore, the CIAs “enhanced interrogation techniques” bleached the provisions of the Geneva Conventions particular article III (Parco and Levy, 3).

nUS Anti-Torture Statute

nThe US anti-torture statute was enacted in order to provide more avenues for legal action because of torturous methods applied by CIA. However, according to this law, the CIA actions on enhanced interrogation techniques were illegal. For instance, the US anti-torture statute allows psychological suffering subjected on detainees (Cummins, 72). The U.S introduced this law in an attempt to adhere with the UN Convention against Torture (CAT). The United States ratified the CAT in 1994. The UN Convention against Torture give every nation the responsibility of judicial, administrative and legislative or other actions in order to prevent cases of torture in all its jurisdictions (Brown, 37).

nThe act can be applied to both citizens and non-citizens of the United States who commits torture inside or outside the country. The statute defines torture as any action conducted by an individual who is under a position of either power to deliberately inflict pain mentally or physical to another individual within his or her custody (Ingelse, 81). Moreover, the statute makes it illegal for persons to conspire to commit an act of torture upon individuals who are under their custody (Boon, Kristen, Huq, and Lovelace, 28). Therefore, the statute provides that formal charges should be presented against the suspect within eight years after they commit the crime. Failure to comply with the provisions of anti-torture statute includes a punishment of up to 20 years in prison (Perrigo and Whitman, 13).

nDetainee Treatment Act

nIn 2005, the US Congress enacted the Detainee Treatment Act. According to this act, it is illegal to use degrading, inhuman and cruel punishment or treatment against any person under custody (Levin, 25). This applies to all areas that are under physical control of the U.S. Most notably, the act covered all prisoners including those in the Guantanamo Bay. Furthermore, the Detainee Treatment act ensured that all military interrogations are conducted through the guidance of Human Intelligence Collector Operations (Cummins, 32). Under this law, all military personnel and government officer who performed the enhanced treatment act would be given immunity from criminal and civil actions.

nUnited Nations Convention against Torture

nThe U.N. Convention against Torture is a treaty that provides human rights to all persons. In its provisions, the treaty discourages cruel and torture as well as inhumane degrading against all individuals. The United States is a signatory to this treaty. The U.N Convention against Torture gives responsibility to all nations to enact legislations to protect its citizens from torture within their jurisdiction (Schafer and Navarro, 11). In addition, it does not allow any nation to transport individuals to other countries where they will be tortured.

nPresident Obama 2009 Executive Order on EITs

nPresident Barack Obama signed a new executive order that prevents the CIA officials from using enhanced interrogation techniques beyond those accepted by military of the United Stated. In this regard, the president ordered the immediate closure of detention camps in Guantanamo Bay (Perrigo and Whitman, 39). Furthermore, his administration restored the countrys counter-terrorism policies. Obamas Executive Order was against that of his predecessor President Bush. Furthermore, the human rights groups highly praised the executive order (Cummins, 32).

nMoreover, Obama ordered the CIA to stop using enhanced interrogation techniques because they were illegal under both international and domestic treaties. Furthermore, the executive order compelled the CIA to close all secret detention facilities across the world. They were also ordered to begin implementation of Article III of the Geneva Conventions, which were ignored under the Bush administration (Perrigo and Whitman, 48). The Geneva Conventions does not allow degrading and humiliating torture of prisoners. The legal memos that offered guidance in execution of the “enhanced interrogation techniques” were no longer to be used. The detainees were to be tried in criminal courts (Brown, 37).

nAccording to human rights activists, these techniques are extremely dangerous for prisoners. For instance, waterboarding can lead to psychological damage, broken bones and damaging the brain (Boon, Kristen, Huq, and Lovelace, 65). Waterboarding encompasses a person being tied on his back in an upside position. The prisoner is then subjected to water through his face and when he or she breathes, water enters his/her lungs. The prisoner begins to struggle and panic while feeling like drowning (Perrigo and Whitman, 98). Other detainees are subjected to sleep deprivation for long period. Moreover, they suffer from sexual threats, painful stress and humiliation.

nAccording to UN Convention against Torture, which the United States is a signatory, torture is referred to as an act by which much suffering or pain is deliberately imposed to an individual either mentally or physically (Cummins, 32). This type of torture is inflicted in order to gain certain information. Furthermore, according to the US Constitution it is illegal to cause unusual and cruel punishment against a person. On the other hand, the United States legal code defines torture as a practice that is particularly planned to cause severe mental and physical suffering or pain (Brown, 28). Therefore, other foreign government agencies and human rights groups argue that Enhanced interrogation Techniques implemented by CIA involve torture.

nHowever, according to former US President George W Bush, the “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques” does not involve torture. Instead, the government made distinction between “enhanced interrogation techniques” and “torture”. Most importantly, upon assuming power, President Barack Obama stopped the program in 2009 because his administration acknowledged that it led to torture. In particular, Mr Obama pointed that waterboarding constituted to torture (Boon, Kristen, Huq, and Lovelace, 39). The Bush administration justified the use of enhanced interrogation techniques through several legal memos between 2002 and 2005. In this regard, the Bush administration argued that these techniques were not degrading, inhuman or cruel under any domestic law or international law (Cummins, 32).

nIn addition, the government defended the EIT by emphasizing measures such as performing the enhanced interrogations under supervision of a psychologist or physician with powers to halt it. For instance one of the memo released by President Obama highlighted that waterboarding would be conducted in circumstances where the CIA had certain information that a detainee possessed “credible information” (Brown, 14). In addition, it also noted that the EIT would be employed when there was intelligence that a terrorist attack was likely to happen and there were crucial indicators. Therefore, the interrogation was intended to obtain actionable intelligence (Feinstein, 61).

nAlthough the “enhanced interrogation techniques” was used for a long period, it remains unclear how many persons were subjected to them. Reports noted that three notorious persons were subjected to waterboarding (Perrigo and Whitman, 63). They included Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zabaydah both of whom were al qaeda suspects. The former was also suspected planner of 9/11 attacks. The third detainee was the suspected planner of the USS Cole attack in 2000 whose name was Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri (Perrigo and Whitman, 14). The White House noted that these methods were effective and they established minimum intelligence of value. For instance, some detainees later revealed that they produced lies in order to please the interrogators. Senate Committee later supported the idea that these interrogation techniques were ineffective ways of obtaining information or acquiring co-operation from suspects (Holtzman and Cooper, 64).

nAdditionally, the senate committee also blamed the CIA for using only two psychologists who had no experience in counter-terrorism and who were used to establish procedures. Furthermore, it also criticised the government for using psychologists without experience to evaluate the effectiveness of the EIT (Boon, Kristen, Huq, and Lovelace, 59).

nHuman rights groups and the UN have asked for prosecution of the US official who implemented the CIA intelligence. In particular according to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism, the United States had the responsibility of prosecuting those involved in order to bring justice to the victim. Nonetheless, President Obama has stated that those who were responsible of implementing the program will not be prosecuted because they acted on advice from the justice department (Perrigo and Whitman, 82). Moreover, the government has conducted a series of investigations concerning “enhanced interrogation techniques” but no individual has been subject to prosecution (Cummins, 32). Similarly, the US Attorney General has stated that there is inadequate evidence on CIA interrogation techniques that guarantee conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. However, the director of CIA at the time defended the CIA arguing that it was able to reveal terrorist attack and capture many terrorists. Consequently, it was able to save many lives (Brown, 76).

nThe interrogation techniques that were applied to detainees were brutal according to the US anti-torture statue. The Senate committee has suggested that the government did not attempt to use other alternatives to this method, which could be non-threatening (Perrigo and Whitman, 71).

nReports also revealed that the CIA used sleep deprivations which according to Geneva Convention is inhumane and against human rights. Furthermore, the detainees were required to remain awake for more than 7 days while they remained standing (Feinstein, 41). In addition, senate committee revealed that more than five detainees are believed to have experienced these mistreatments leading to disturbing hallucinations (Brown, 87). The effects of waterboarding were also disturbing to the detainee because it produced drowning sensations (Parco and Levy, 61). The Central Intelligence Agency was further accused of omitting crucial information that was obtained through other methods. For instance, several reports stated that many detainees provided crucial intelligence before and without being treated under “enhanced interrogation techniques” (Perrigo and Whitman, 98). The former director of CIA Mr Michael Hayden confessed that “enhanced interrogation techniques” were ineffective as compared to non-confrontational techniques. For instance, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed provides accurate intelligence before these techniques were used as compared to when enhance interrogation be used (Brown, 83).

nConclusion

nThe “enhanced interrogation techniques” that the CIA used during Bush administration are illegal. The provisions of both domestic and international laws do not allow the agency to conduct inhumane treatment and torture against the detainees. Some of such methods include waterboarding, sleep deprivation and confinement all of which are illegal. However, the executive order issued by President Barack Obama has suspended the application of these interrogation techniques to detainees (Boon, Kristen, Huq, and Lovelace, 39. This is the best idea because it safeguards the human rights for all groups across the world.

n

nWork cited

nBoon, Kristen E, Aziz Z Huq, and Douglas C Lovelace. Terrorism. New York: Oxford university press, 2010. Print.

nBoon, Kristen, Aziz Z Huq, and Douglas C Lovelace. Terror-Based Interrogation. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.

nBrown, Bartram S. Research Handbook On International Criminal Law. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2011. Print.

nCummins, Sally J. Digest Of United States Practice In International Law 2006. Oxford Univ Pr, 2007. Print.

nFeinstein, Dianne. The Senate Intelligence Committee Report On Torture. 2014. Print.

nHoltzman, Elizabeth, and Cynthia Cooper. Cheating Justice. Boston: Beacon Press, 2012. Print.

nIngelse, Chris. The UN Committee Against Torture. The Hague: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Print.

nLevin, Carl. Statement Of Senator Carl Levin On Senate Armed Services Committee Report Of Its Inquiry Into The Treatment Of Detainees In U.S. Custody. [Washington, D.C.]: [Office of Senator Carl Levin], 2008. Print.

nParco, James E, and David A Levy. Attitudes Aren’t Free. Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala.: Air University Press, 2010. Print.

nPerrigo, Sarah, and Jim Whitman. The Geneva Conventions Under Assault. London: Pluto Press, 2010. Print.

nSchafer, John R, and Joe Navarro. Advanced Interviewing Techniques. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, 2010. Print.