No Immunity for Torture - The Case Against Donald Rumsfeld

Open Letter to the French Minister of Justice in the Rumsfeld Torture Case


The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), its member organizations in the United States, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and in France, the « Ligue française des droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen » (LDH), as well as the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), today sent an open letter to France’s Minister of Justice, Madame Rachida Dati. In it, the organizations request that she intervene with the Public Prosecutor of the Paris Appeals Court and ask him to withdraw his decision of February 27, 2008 granting former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld immunity from criminal jurisdiction for acts of torture. The letter was also sent to Mr. Bernard Kouchner, France’s Minister of Foreign Affairs.

On October 25, 2007, the plaintiff organizations filed a complaint before the Paris District Prosecutor against Rumsfeld on the occasion of a private visit in Paris. The complaint alleged that Rumsfeld, in violation of the Convention against Torture, ratified by France and implemented in French legislation, is responsible for having directly and personally crafted and ordered the use of ”harsh” interrogation techniques constituting torture. The complaint, accompanied by several hundred pages of evidence, also alleges that such techniques were implemented under his supervision, notably at Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib, and that, starting in 2002, Rumsfeld personally managed several torture sessions of terrorist suspects.

The Paris Prosecutor dismissed the complaint and granted Rumsfeld immunity, purportedly basing his decision on an opinion drafted by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The plaintiffs had, without success, contested the dismissal of the complaint before the Public Prosecutor, a higher authority.

The open letter addressed to Justice Minister Dati demonstrates in particular that the prosecutors’ opinion fails to articulate any valid legal justification for the personal immunity of Rumsfeld, a former Secretary of Defense; that it ignores the principle that there is no immunity for international core crimes such as torture; and alleges that by granting immunity to former officials for such crimes, the decision contravenes the very purpose of the French legislation implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture.

the CAT. The letter goes on to say it does - violate both French and International - but *I* don't know

International law? I believe it violated the spirit of the law(s) against torture. Simply because, and if for no other reason, than because of why such exists. Not just people committing crimes against humanity - but such crimes occurring during power struggles by those seeking and gaining power ("leaders", " govt. officials")

Just as Ollie North still is.



Further Evidence Rumsfeld Implicated in War Crimes
Please read this important post by Marty Lederman, Army Confirms: Rumsfeld Authorized Criminal Conduct.

Here's a key section, but there's more:
The Army's charges against Jordan reflect the view, undoubtedly correct, that the use of forced nudity or intimidation with dogs against detainees subject to military control constitutes cruelty and maltreatment that Article 93 makes criminal. It doesn't matter whether they are or are not "torture," as such; nor does it matter whether the armed forces should be permitted to use such interrogation techniques: As things currently stand, they are unlawful, as even the Army now acknowledges.

But then how can we account for the actions of the Secretary of Defense and his close aides?

On November 27, 2002, Pentagon General Counsel William Haynes, following discussions with Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, General Myers, and Doug Feith, informed the Secretary of Defense that forced nudity and the use of the fear of dogs to induce stress were lawful techniques, and he recommended that they be approved for use at Guantanamo.

(The lists of techniques to which Haynes was referring can be found in this memorandum.) On December 2, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld approved those techniques for use at Guantanamo -- and subsequently those techniques were used on detainee Mohammed al-Qahtani.

In other words, the Secretary of Defense authorized criminal conduct.

...

Today's Army charge under UCMJ Article 93 against Lt. Col. Jordan -- for conduct that the SecDef actually authorized as to some detainees -- demonstrates that Rumsfeld approved of, and encouraged, violations of the criminal law.
http://www.discourse.net/archives/2006/04/further_evidence_rumsfeld_implicated_in_war_crimes.html

He lied to the public without torture batting an eye and his solution to Abu Graib was to put up signs forbidding photography.