On the
subject of torture:Is anything OK in
post-9/11 America?
[2-28-05]
An
op-ed
column in today's New York Times relates the experience of Maher
Arar, a Canadian citizen who was picked up in the fall of 2002 by John
Ashcroft's Justice Department and shipped off to Syria for a year of brutal
treatment -- thanks to the US's pattern of outsourcing torture, now renamed
"extraordinary rendition."
You may want to read this editorial comment, and then read
"A Resolution and Confession on the Torture and Abuse of Prisoners," adopted
by the 2004 General Assembly.
Thanks to the Washington Office
A Resolution
and Confession on the Torture and Abuse of Prisoners.
The treatment of those incarcerated in the naval base in
Guantanamo, Cuba, and in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (and perhaps
elsewhere), has highlighted serious legal and moral issues that cannot be
ignored and must not be allowed to pass unexamined. Violations of
international law as well as serious moral malfeasance are involved.
Such treatment is contrary to the Geneva Convention
Relative to Treatment of Prisoners of War (1949), particularly Articles 13,
14, 15, 17, and 18. Article 17, Fifth Paragraph, provides:
Neither physical or mental torture nor any other form of
coercion may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them
information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may
not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous
treatment of any kind.
Objections to such practices have been voiced by lawyers
within the armed services as well as by human rights organizations. Such
practices have been deplored by a great majority of the citizens of our
country, quite irrespective of their views as to the legitimacy of taking
military action against Iraq. These actions have undercut American claims to
a moral high ground and opened the way for enemies to maltreat members of
our own society that fall into their hands. Moreover, they constitute
flagrant violations of the
Geneva Convention
Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, to which the United
States is a signatory.
As citizens of our country, members of the Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.) have been urged to engage in repentance for these actions,
even if their personal responsibility for them is indirect and minimal. That
call for repentance is an indication of the extent to which these actions
must be deplored.
But efforts must be made to ensure that such actions are
eliminated from future practice. This can be done only if there is a
complete and adequate understanding as to why they have arisen B a matter of
present uncertainty and possible confusion.
[3. Further, efforts must be made to ensure that such
torture and abuse do not occur in the future. To that end, the 216th General
Assembly (2004) directs the Stated Clerk to take the following actions:
[a. Commend all who have brought this prison abuse to the
attention of the public as well as all who have recognized the seriousness
of the issues raised and the need to deal vigorously with the policy and
administrative questions that are involved;
[b. Urge the U.S. Congress to direct an appropriate
independent and formal inquiry to determine what led to these events. This
body should have full investigative powers and issue its findings publicly.
[c. Urge government officials to develop safeguards that
will serve to prevent such behavior from arising in the future.
[4. Write and send a pastoral letter to the churches,
communicating the intent of this resolution.]
For more information, contact:
Rich Houston
Presbyterian Washington Office
100 Maryland Ave. NE, Suite 410
Washington, DC 20002
202-543-1126, fax 202-543-7755.
Email rhouston@ctr.pcusa.org
