September 18, 2006
A standoff is looming between the Bush Adminstration and Senate Republicans over two bills now before Congress.
Banksy, I need someone to protect me from all the measures they take in order to protect me
Marty Lederman in a post at Balkinization says that though the various other statutory proposals now being debated do raise other serious questions the current legislative debate is about the Administration seeking authority to use threats of violence, and the cruel physical techniques akin to classic forms of torture.
He adds:
It's important to be clear about one thing: The question is not simply whether, in the abstract, it would be a good or acceptable idea for the United States to use such techniques in certain extreme circumstances on certain detainees. I happen to think that the moral, pragmatic, diplomatic and other costs of doing so greatly outweigh any speculative and uncertain benefits -- but that is obviously a question on which there is substantial public disagreement, much of it quite sincere and serious. Instead, the question must be placed in its historical and international context -- namely, whether Congress should grant the Executive branch a fairly unbounded discretion to use such techniques where such conduct would place the United States in breach of the Geneva Conventions. And that, of course, changes the calculus considerably. Does Congress really want to make the United States the first nation on earth to specifically provide domestic legal sanction for what would properly and universally be seen as a transparent breach of the minimum, baseline standards for civilized treatment of prisoners established by Common Article 3 -- thereby dealing a grievous blow to the prospect of international adherence to the Geneva Conventions in the future?
The big-ticket item is whether the CIA should be authorized to engage in "cruel treatment" in breach of our obligations under the Geneva Conventions.
|