Court challenge to torture in Afghanistan
Robert Peffers
By Stefan Christoff | November 19, 2007
In Canada, Amnesty International has filed a landmark lawsuit directed
at the Canadian government, on the basis that Canada is violating the
constitution by handing over prisoners to Afghan authorities in the
context of NATO military operations in the country and accusations of
widespread torture in Afghan prisons.
Human rights organizations in Canada, including Amnesty International
and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, have sued the
government in the context of widespread media reports that prisoners
captured by Canadian forces were facing torture in Afghan prisons.
Last week a major decision was released by Canada's Federal Court,
which ruled the lawsuit filed concerning torture in Afghanistan has
grounds on which to move forward despite major legal maneuvers from
government legal representatives to have the legal challenge thrown
out of court.
Currently Canada maintains over 2500 troops in Afghanistan, mainly in
the southern province of Kandahar, in a military mission that the
majority of people in Canada don't support, according to repeated
opinion polls. Alex Neve, the Secretary General of Amnesty
International in Canada, comments on the current Federal Court case
and answers questions from Stefan Christoff of Radio Tadamon!
Alex Neve: Amnesty International has had long standing concerns with
the approach that Canada has been taking to handling prisoners
apprehended by Canadian forces in the context of conflict in
Afghanistan. Canada has been deployed in Afghanistan since early 2002
and since then Canada has been taking prisoners.
As a human rights organization we want to ensure that Canada is
treating those prisoners in a way that is completely consistent with
international human rights standards. Initially Canada decided that
they would hand all prisoners over to U.S. forces in Afghanistan and
Amnesty raised concerns on this matter given that there are many
concerns related to U.S. practices in Afghanistan, including the fact
that many of those prisoners were going to end up being held in
Guantanamo Bay.
Amnesty asked Canada to change and revise that practice. After several
years the government finally decided to do so, but rather than taking
the responsibility of taking the prisoners onto their own shoulders,
they decided to turn to another country, this time Afghanistan itself
and since the end of 2005 Canada's practice has been to hand the
prisoners to Afghan authorities.
Advertising
Our concern is that in Afghan prisons torture is rampant and
systematic, in which context in our view it's very likely that a good
number of those who are transferred from Canadian custody into the
Afghan prison system will therefore end up being tortured. If the risk
of torture is a real one, which Amnesty believes it is, it's incumbent
upon Canada and it's actually a matter of international legal
obligation not to hand the prisoners over and to instead adopt some
other approach, some other way of keeping those prisoners in custody
that corresponds with international law.
Stefan Christoff: Can you address the current legal challenge that
Amnesty has launched in Canada, and explain Amnesty's role and
specifically the Federal Court decision that was made this past week?
Neve: Amnesty tried repeatedly to have this matter addressed through
political channels, we repeatedly brought our concerns to the
attention of the Minister of National Defense in particular, asking
that Canada adopt a new approach, a new strategy and those requests
fell on deaf ears. The government refused to revise its policy or
practice in any way and in the end Amnesty felt that there was no
other option but to turn to the courts for a remedy.
Amnesty joined up with the British Colombia Civil Liberties
Association, which shared our concerns, and we launched a lawsuit in
February of this year in which we are seeking a Federal Court order
that the practice of handing prisoners over to Afghan authorities
cease.
The Canadian government is fighting vigorously against our lawsuit and
earlier last month we were in court responding to a government
application to try to have our lawsuit summarily dismissed at the
outset as being groundless. The government threw every possible
argument they could at the court in what really seemed like a
desperate effort to try to have the lawsuit thrown out of court before
it receives a full hearing.
On Monday [November 5], more quickly than expected, the Federal Court
decision on that particular application came out and the government's
application was unequivocally rejected on every count. It's a very
strong judgment that underscores that the issues we have brought
forward are important issues that are perfectly appropriate for a
court to be looking at. Issues that are far from groundless and do
involve very critical human rights concerns and on that basis the
Federal Court has ruled that the case can go ahead and we look forward
to a full hearing being set in the next two to three months, we hope.
Christoff: Could you explain the details within the reports, the
information that Amnesty International has received from the ground in
Afghanistan regarding the situation of Afghan prisoners. Earlier this
year there was a breaking story that was published in the Globe and
Mail, written by Graeme Smith, detailing accounts of torture. Can you
talk about the information that you have received that lead you to
take action on this issue?
Neve: Sadly there is nothing new about the proposition that torture is
systematic and widespread in Afghanistan. This is not something that
has suddenly emerged since the 2001 war and the new government; it is
a long-standing concern and reality in the Afghan prison system, an
issue that Amnesty International has documented and reported on
publicly for many, many years.
The particular concerns as to what happens to battle field prisoners
who end up in Afghan prisons is a new issue. It's been very difficult
to get clear information as to what is happening to those prisoners.
From a Canadian perspective the government for instance refuses to
identify who those prisoners are, refuses to give their names or any
details. Also Canada refuses to allow them to have any access to
lawyers, which makes it very difficult to do any specific research.
Amnesty very much welcomed the great work that the Globe and Mail was
able to do in terms of getting access to some of the prisoners after
they had been released from Afghan prisons. In the course of that work
the Globe and Mail documented some very serious and disturbing
allegations of torture. Now, they haven't been proven but they are
very detailed allegations that are certainly credible and consistent
with other information that is available to us with regard to the
practice of torture in Afghanistan and therefore is something that the
government should be taking very seriously.
Sadly instead, at every turn, from responding to questions in the
House of Commons, or the kinds of arguments that the government
lawyers have been advancing in court, instead the line that has been
taken has been to try to diminish and dismiss out of hand these
allegations because they come from "Taliban fighters" and therefore
aren't worthy of consideration. Well, when it comes to torture it
doesn't matter if you are a Taliban fighter or a humanitarian worker,
you should not be tortured and allegations made that you have been
tortured should be fairly and impartially investigated and that's
where Canada is falling short.
Canuck57
> Court challenge to torture in Afghanistan
> By Stefan Christoff | November 19, 2007
>
> In Canada, Amnesty International has filed a landmark lawsuit directed
> at the Canadian government, on the basis that Canada is violating the
> constitution by handing over prisoners to Afghan authorities in the
> context of NATO military operations in the country and accusations of
> widespread torture in Afghan prisons.
Funny how they get tortured in their own country by their own people in
the prisons they built. What goes around, comes around....
And we sure don't want that human garbage here.
I know it was a different country, but the execution of Saddam Insane
was a good example.