Ban Torture

• Security Detainees/Enemy Combatants: U.S. Law Prohibits Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment - Human Rights Watch
• Law and executive disorder: President gives green light to secret detention program - Amnesty International (August 17, 2007)

International law applicable to the United States

• 1949 Geneva Conventions of 1949 (ratified by US in 1955)
• 1977 Protocol I of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
• Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture)
  • 1990 U.S. reservations
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• U.N. Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment
• U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

Other international law not ratified by the United States

• 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (pdf 448kb)
• December 31, 2000. President Clinton signs the ICC treaty.
• May 6, 2002. President Bush withdraws from the ICC treaty.
• August 3, 2002. President Bush signed into law the American Servicemember Protection Act of 2002, which authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the International Criminal Court (the “Hague invasion act“).

U.S. law

• Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, arts. 77-134)
• 1996 The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
• 1994 U.S. Code on Torture (18 U.S.C. § 2340A)
• 2000 Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-778)
• September 18, 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force
• March 11, 2004. The U.N. Convention Against Torture: Overview of U.S. Implementation Policy Concerning the Removal of Aliens, by Michael John Garcia for Congressional Research Service
• 2005 Defense Authorization bill
  • The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (The McCain Amendment)
    • Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977
    • Pub.L. 109-148, div. A, tit. X, §§ 1001-1006, 119 Stat. 2680, 2739-44 (2005)
  • The Graham/Levin Amendment
  • President’s Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863
    • The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks. Further, in light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2001 in Alexander v. Sandoval, and noting that the text and structure of Title X do not create a private right of action to enforce Title X, the executive branch shall construe Title X not to create a private right of action. Finally, given the decision of the Congress reflected in subsections 1005(e) and 1005(h) that the amendments made to section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, shall apply to past, present, and future actions, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in that section, and noting that section 1005 does not confer any constitutional right upon an alien detained abroad as an enemy combatant, the executive branch shall construe section 1005 to preclude the Federal courts from exercising subject matter jurisdiction over any existing or future action, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in section 1005.
• June 29, 2006. Salim Ahmed Hamdan v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, et al. No. 05-184. Decision by the Supreme Court.
• September 17, 2006. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA)
• July 20, 2007. Executive Order: Interpretation of the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 as Applied to a Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency
• Separate executive order, still secret, outlining approved enhanced interrogation techniques
• January 8, 2008. The D.C. Circuit Court ruled that prisoners have no right to sue top Pentagon officials and military officers for allegedly torturing them and defiling their religious beliefs while they were held at Guantanamo Bay. Rasul, et al., v. Myers, et al. (Circuit docket 06-5209) and National Institute of Military Justice v. Department of Defense (06-5242).
• The Supreme Court is considering two cases, Boumediene v. Bush (06-1195) and Al Odah v. United States (06-1196), as to whether individuals captured abroad and held at Guantanamo Bay have any constitutional rights, including a right to challenge their detention in civilian U.S. courts. A decision is expected by early summer. Audio and transcript from the December 5th oral arguments.

Current Investigations

• The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility is investigating whether Bush administration lawyers violated professional standards by issuing legal opinions that authorized the CIA to use waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques (since 2004, revealed February 2008; The Washington Post)
• Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey assigned a special U.S. attorney to investigate whether CIA officials committed crimes by destroying interrogation videotapes of two high-level al-Qaeda detainees, including one who was waterboarded. But Mukasey has rebuffed demands from Congress to investigate the interrogations themselves, saying officials were acting under legal advice from the Justice Department. (Since January 2008; The Washington Post)

Updated frequently. Last updated March 26, 2008.