Justice interrogation memo: Constitution not in play
|
|
The Department of Justice late Tuesday released declassified 2003 memorandum long sought a congress Democrats and other critics of the administration said that the government of the legal justification for harsh interrogation techniques by the military against enemy combatants captured outside the United States. (Below is a portion of the second part memo). The note, written by John Yoo, then an architect of the policy of legal certainty in the wake of 9 / 11, dismisses several legal obstacles to the use extreme techniques. Yoo has long been one of those who support an aggressive approach in the fight against terrorism and faithful to the authority of the executive branch. But the memo was regarded as official government policy, less than a year after they were written. At the 14 March 2003 memo, Yoo, the Constitution has been said is not at stake with regard to interrogation, as the fifth amendment (pursuant to a statute of the process) and the Eighth Amendment (which prevents the government the use of cruelty and customary Penalty) means “not extraterrestrials enemy combatants abroad.” The note is to declare that the provisions of criminal law with regard to the attack of the Confederation, and other crimes against the body which is not permitted for military interrogations overseas and statutes for the behavior American officials abroad, in connection with war crimes and torture is an obligation limited to the part of the interviewer to renounce injury. It also defines the obligations of the United States under the United Nations Convention against Torture and other international treaties on the prohibition of torture, in order to ensure that interrogators do not apply to “punishment cruel and unusual “, as defined in the American Constitution of law Regardless of the various international standards. And he says repeatedly officals view of the administration that the Geneva Conventions, which govern the treatment of prisoners of war does not apply to members of al-Qaida and the Taliban. The Yoo’s memo also to the belief that the executive branch had the authority inherent in the war over time to obtain information say necessarily dangerous: “If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner likely to injure a criminal prohibition, it would be in order to prevent further attacks against the United States by terrorist organization al-Qaeda, the network, “Yoo wrote. “In this case, we believe that it could be argued that the executive branch of the constitutional authority to protect the nation against attacks justify its action.” It was during the year 2003, while the operational memory was that the guards and other military personnel compels the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, in Baghdad, Iraq. The memo was shortly after, but always before the abuses came to the foundation. The memo to Yoo William Haynes, and the Pentagon’s General Counsel, and another major player in the strategic management of the law. It was downgraded Monday Haynes’ successors, Daniel Dell ‘Orto. Yoo Jura is now a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has always been again asked the Justice Ministry to release the memory, and others like him, had this to say Tuesday night : It has been more than four months since I asked the White House - again - to downgrade the secrecy of the Department of Justice for interrogation rating practices. Today, the removal of such a memory is a small step forward, but by no means satisfied that requirement. The administration is still shield memos also by several members of Congress. The declassified memo they have today reflects the expansion of the executive order, has been the hallmark of this administration. It is not surprising that this note, as now, the famous “Bybee memo”, the control could not resist and had to be withdrawn. As the “Bybee memo, the note wants to find ways to avoid legal restrictions and accountability of torture and threatens the state of our country as a guarantor of human rights throughout the world. |