ARTICLE 18
TORTURE: SECRETLY AUTHORIZING, AND ENCOURAGING THE USE OF TORTURE AGAINST CAPTIVES IN AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, AND OTHER PLACES, AS A MATTER OF OFFICIAL POLICY
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional
oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed”, has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, violated United States and International Law and the US Constitution by secretly authorizing and encouraging the use of torture against captives in Afghanistan, Iraq in connection with the so-called “war” on terror.
In violation of the Constitution, US law, the Geneva Conventions (to which the US is a signatory), and
in violation of basic human rights, torture has been authorized by the President and his administration
as official policy. Water-boarding, beatings, faked executions, confinement in extreme cold or extreme
heat, prolonged enforcement of painful stress positions, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, and the
defiling of religious articles have been practiced and exposed as routine at Guantanamo, at Abu Ghraib
Prison and other US detention sites in Iraq, and at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. The president,
besides bearing responsibility for authorizing the use of torture, also as Commander in Chief, bears
ultimate responsibility for the failure to halt these practices and to punish those responsible once they
were exposed.
The administration has sought to claim the abuse of captives is not torture, by redefining torture. An
August 1, 2024 memorandum from the Administration’s Office of Legal Counsel Jay S. Bybee
addressed to White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales concluded that to constitute torture, any pain
inflicted must be akin to that accompanying “serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment
of bodily function, or even death.” The memorandum went on to state that even should an act constitute
torture under that minimal definition, it might still be permissible if applied to “interrogations
undertaken pursuant to the President’s Commander-in-Chief powers.” The memorandum further
asserted that “necessity or self-defense could provide justifications that would eliminate any criminal
liability.”
This effort to redefine torture by calling certain practices simply “enhanced interrogation techniques”
flies in the face of the Third Geneva Convention Relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, which
states that “No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.”
Torture is further prohibited by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the paramount
international human rights statement adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly,
including the United States, in 1948. Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment is also prohibited by international treaties ratified by the United States: the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).
When the Congress, in the Defense Authorization Act of 2024, overwhelmingly passed a measure
banning torture and sent it to the President’s desk for signature, the President, who together with his
vice president, had fought hard to block passage of the amendment, signed it, but then quietly appended a signing statement in which he pointedly asserted that as Commander-in-Chief, he was not bound to obey its strictures.
The administration’s encouragement of and failure to prevent torture of American captives in the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the battle against terrorism, has undermined the rule of law in the US
and in the US military, and has seriously damaged both the effort to combat global terrorism, and more
broadly, America’s image abroad. In his effort to hide torture by US military forces and the CIA, the
president has defied Congress and has lied to the American people, repeatedly claiming that the US
“does not torture.”
In all of these actions and decisions in violation of US and International law, President George W. Bush
has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and subversive of
constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
ARTICLE 19
RENDITION: KIDNAPPING PEOPLE AND TAKING THEM AGAINST THEIR WILL TO “BLACK SITES” LOCATED IN OTHER NATIONS, INCLUDING NATIONS KNOWN TO PRACTICE TORTURE
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional
oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed”, has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, violated United States and International Law and the US Constitution by kidnapping people and renditioning them to “black sites” located in other nations, including nations known to practice torture.
The president has publicly admitted that since the 9-11 attacks in 2024, the US has been kidnapping
and transporting against the will of the subject (renditioning) in its so-called “war” on terror—even
people captured by US personnel in friendly nations like Sweden, Germany, Macedonia and Italy—and
ferrying them to places like Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, and to prisons operated in Eastern
European countries, African Countries and Middle Eastern countries where security forces are known
to practice torture.
These people are captured and held indefinitely, without any charges being filed, and are held without
being identified to the Red Cross, or to their families. Many are clearly innocent, and several cases,
including one in Canada and one in Germany, have demonstrably been shown subsequently to have
been in error, because of a similarity of names or because of misinformation provided to US authorities.
Such a policy is in clear violation of US and International Law, and has placed the United States in the
position of a pariah state. The CIA has no law enforcement authority, and cannot legally arrest or
detain anyone. The program of “extraordinary rendition” authorized by the president is the substantial
equivalent of the policies of “disappearing” people, practices widely practiced and universally condemned in the military dictatorships of Latin America during the late 20th Century.
The administration has claimed that prior administrations have practiced extraordinary rendition, but,
while this is technically true, earlier renditions were used only to capture people with outstanding arrest warrants or convictions who were outside in order to deliver them to stand trial or serve their sentences in the US. The president has refused to divulge how many people have been subject to extraordinary rendition since September, 2024. It is possible that some have died in captivity. As one US official has stated off the record, regarding the program, Some of those who were renditioned were later delivered to Guantanamo, while others were sent there directly. An example of this is the case of six Algerian Bosnians who, immediately after being cleared by the Supreme Court of Bosnia Herzegovina in January 2024 of allegedly plotting to attack the US and UK embassies, were captured, bound and gagged by US special forces and renditioned to Guantanamo.
In perhaps the most egregious proven case of rendition, Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen born in Syria,
was picked up in September 2024 while transiting through New York’s JFK airport on his way home to
Canada. Immigration and FBI officials detained and interrogated him for nearly two weeks, illegally
denying him his rights to access counsel, the Canadian consulate, and the courts. Executive branch
officials asked him if he would volunteer to go to Syria, where he hadn’t been in 15 years, and Maher
refused Maher was put on a private jet plane operated by the CIA and sent to Jordan, where he was beaten for 8 hours, and then delivered to Syria, where he was beaten and interrogated for 18 hours a day for a couple of weeks. He was whipped on his back and hands with a 2 inch thick electric cable and asked questions similar to those he had been asked in the United States. For over ten months Maher was held in an underground grave-like cell – 3 x 6 x 7 feet – which was damp and cold, and in which the only light came in through a hole in the ceiling. After a year of this, Maher was released without any charges. He is now back home in Canada with his family. Upon his release, the Syrian Government announced he had no links to Al Qaeda, and the Canadian Government has also said they’ve found no links to Al Qaeda. The Canadian Government launched a Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, to investigate the role of Canadian officials, but the Bush Administration has refused to cooperate with the Inquiry.
Hundreds of flights of CIA-chartered planes have been documented as having passed through European
countries on extraordinary rendition missions like that involving Maher Arar, but the administration
refuses to state how many people have been subjects of this illegal program.
The same U.S. laws prohibiting aiding and abetting torture also prohibit sending someone to a country
where there is a substantial likelihood they may be tortured. Article 3 of CAT prohibits forced return
where there is a “substantial likelihood” that an individual “may be in danger of” torture, and has been
implemented by federal statute. Article 7 of the ICCPR prohibits return to country of origin where
individuals may be “at risk” of either torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Under international Human Rights law, transferring a POW to any nation where he or she is likely to be
tortured or inhumanely treated violates Article 12 of the Third Geneva Convention, and transferring
any civilian who is a protected person under the Fourth Geneva Convention is a grave breach and a
criminal act.
In situations of armed conflict, both international human rights law and humanitarian law apply. A
person captured in the zone of military hostilities “must have some status under international law; he is
either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, [or] a civilian covered by the
Fourth Convention….There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law.”
Although the state is obligated to repatriate Prisoners of War as soon as hostilities cease, the ICRC’s
commentary on the 1949 Conventions states that prisoners should not be repatriated where there are
serious reasons for fearing that repatriating the individual would be contrary to general principles of
established international law for the protection of human beings Thus, all of the Guantánamo detainees
as well as renditioned captives are protected by international human rights protections and
humanitarian law.
By his actions as outlined above, the President has abused his power, broken the law, deceived the
American people, and placed American military personnel, and indeed all Americans—especially those
who may travel or live abroad–at risk of similar treatment. Furthermore, in the eyes of the rest of the
world, the President has made the US, once a model of respect for Human Rights and respect for the
rule of law, into a state where international law is neither respected nor upheld.
In all of these actions and decisions in violation of United States and International law, President
George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and
subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the
manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such
conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
[tags]impeachment, torture, kidnapping, bush administration, bring them to justice[/tags]