EU Torture Committee has facts on CIA at Shannon

by Seán Ryan Mon May 01, 2006 17:24

I agree that the commissioner bears a lot of guilt for not ordering the Gardaí to investigate rendition etc.

However a Garda cannot be ordered not to perform his or her duty.

Reasonable suspicion warrants investigation, indeed it is enough for a member of the force to search a member of the public.

What is reasonable suspicion?

That's a good question and it's one I have yet to hear a definitive answer on.

Let me describe something that I myself find to be reasonably suspicious.

*** Thousands of innocents have been rendered via planes that regularly land at Shannon and God knows where else in this country.

*** No country has admitted to allowing rendition to violate their sovereignty.

*** The Irish justice system and the Irish people do not accept assurances as evidence. Fact not hearsay.

A question or two for the Gardaí.

If nobody allows their transit, how do those who are illegally kidnapped get to their destination?

Isn't it suspicious that rendition flights only ever stop to fuel up considering they never contain victims?

Allow me to expand on the second question.

A = place of torture.
B = country where plane makes a pit stop to refuel.
C = country where the illegal kidnapping occurs.

We can prove the 'A - B - C' flight route. Ie our government admits to fueling rendition planes.

However if 'A - B - C' flight route exists then the 'C - B - A' flight route necessarily exists and it can be reasonably assumed that destinations referred to a 'B' are the same in either flight route until proven otherwise.

What countries are represented by 'B' in the 'C - B - A' flight route?

I know my little scenario above could be shown to be false, but this could only happen after an actual investigation discounted it.

If a singular garda found the activities in Shannon to be reasonably suspicious, it was and is his or her duty to investigate, or if ordered not to investigate, it was and is his or her duty to make this public.

The stink goes all the way to the top and I'm not trying to deny this. I'm just saying that the little turds in all this need to be kept in mind also.

I would be interested in hearing from the Gardái which countries do facilitate rendition in their opinion, since they discount the possibility that we facilitate it without telling us how they know.

Twould be nice to ask the commissioner about this last point and watch him squirm as he tells us about government and American assurances.

Rest assured that I'm not assured.

by Coilín Mon May 01, 2006 15:51

I think it must be Garda Commissioner Noel Conroy's duty to ensure that the gardaí at Shannon, or perhaps detectives drafted in from elsewhere, search CIA aircraft landing at the airport to ensure that they are not carrying victims of the CIA's torture programme, or to gather evidence that they have done so.

If the gardaí would just do their job, then we might find the smoking gun that some of our political leaders have been demanding.

Since the gardaí at Shannon have so far NOT been doing their job as regards searching aircraft that certainly HAVE been involved in international abductions, perhaps we should complain to the Garda Síochána Complaints Board?

Below are a few relevant excerpts from the websites of the Garda Síochána and Information on Public Services, respectively.

Best,
Coilín.

.

Office of the Garda Commissioner

The general direction and control of the Garda Síochána is the responsibility of the Garda Commissioner who is appointed by the Government. He is responsible to the Minister for Justice, Equality & Law Reform, who in turn is accountable to the Dáil (the Irish legislature) for the activities of the Service. While legislation permits the appointment to be made from outside the Service, the Commissioner is normally a police officer who has risen through the ranks.

The Commissioner has his Office at Garda Headquarters. ...

http://www.garda.ie/angarda/hq/commoffice.html

****

Garda Commissioner Noel Conroy

Noel Conroy is the current Commissioner of An Garda Síochána and was appointed in July 2003.

He is a native of Blacksod, Co. Mayo and joined the Garda Síochána in 1963.

He has served in Finglas, Kevin Street, Cabra, Store Street, Santry, Central Detective Unit and at the Crime & Security Section at Garda Headquarters. Most of his service has been in Detective Branch.

...

He has graduated from executive programmes in policing in Europe from the FBI Academy and the FBI National Executive Institute.

http://www.garda.ie/angarda/management/noelconroy.html

****

The Garda Siochana Complaints Board is an independent statutory agency that deals with complaints from citizens about members of An Garda Siochana (the Irish police force). The Board is linked to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, but is entirely independent in the operation of its functions.

...

The Board deals with complaints that contain allegations of criminal offences and improper conduct. Improper conduct consists of:

* Discourtesy
* Neglect of duty
* Falsehood or prevarication
* Abuse of authority
...
* Discreditable conduct
* Being an accessory to the above.

...

If your complaint is successful

If a complaint alleging criminal behaviour is successful, the Board will refer the complaint to the Director of Public Prosecutions who will consider whether a criminal prosecution should be brought against any member of the Garda Siochana. If the Director of Public Prosecutions decides that no prosecution should be taken or if the successful complaint does involve an allegation of criminal behaviour, the Board must decide whether the evidence indicates that a member of the Garda Siochana may be guilty of improper conduct.

If the Board decides that the evidence indicates that a Garda may be guilty of improper conduct, it can do one of two things:

* If the improper conduct is considered to be minor, refer the matter to the Garda Commissioner who will either issue advice to, admonish or warn the Garda in question
* If the improper conduct is considered to be serious, refer the matter to a Tribunal.

Tribunals

Tribunals are made up of three people - two members of the Garda Siochana Complaints Board who have not had any previous dealings with the complaint, one of whom must be a practising barrister or solicitor with at least 10 years experience, and a senior Garda officer nominated by the Garda Commissioner.

... If the Tribunal decides that the allegations contained in the complaint are proven, it can:

* Issue a formal caution, reprimand or warning
* Impose a fine of up to four weeks pay
* Reduce a Garda in rank
* Order the dismissal of a Garda
* Require the Garda to retire or resign as an alternative to dismissal

...

http://oasis.gov.ie/justice/general/garda_siochana_comp....html

by Coilín ÓhAiseadha Mon May 01, 2006 15:08 Máigh Nuad, Co. Cill Dara 086 060 3818

Thanks, Ed.

Here's another item of vital significance that - to the best of my reading - the trad and sad Irish media have either failed to notice, or deliberately ignored.

Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe, has confirmed that European countries have failed in their duty to take proper legislative and administrative measures to protect individuals against violations of human rights committed by agents of friendly foreign security services. As a matter of fact, some European countries have participated actively in the extraordinary renditions, and thus in crimes of torture.

Here is a summary of key points made by the Secretary General at a recent press conference:
1. Virtually none of the COE's member states have proper legislative and administrative measures to effectively protect individuals against violations of human rights committed by agents of "friendly" foreign security services operating on their territory. Asking for diplomatic assurances is inadequate. [Bertie, did you get that?]
2. We no longer need to speak about “alleged” cases of rendition. The COE has received official acknowledgment of “handing over” individuals to foreign officials through procedures which ignore the standards and safeguards required by the European Convention on Human Rights and other legal instruments of the Council of Europe.
3. The primary objective of the COE's inquiry is not to look for a “smoking gun” of possible wrongdoing by our member states, but first and foremost to review and reinforce our legal arsenal for the protection of human rights.
4. If human rights of individuals have been violated, this should be dealt with primarily by the competent authorities at the national level and eventually by the European Court of Human Rights.

[More details below.]

From the above, it is clear that the Irish government must intervene proactively and pre-emptively to ensure that the facilities at Shannon are not abused, and that the ministers, Garda Commissioner et al. cannot escape their responsibility by trying to discredit the detailed prima facie evidence that Shannon is involved in the programme of extraordinary renditions. At this stage, the onus is not on concerned citizens such as Ed Horgan to provide further evidence of our participation in crimes of torture; the onus is now on the Irish government to prove and to ensure that victims of the CIA's programme of illegal abductions are NOT being transported through Shannon.

Best,
Coilín.

****

Speaking notes for the press conference of Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe
Wednesday, 12 April at 2 PM

...

As you know, following the publication of my first interim assessment of the information provided by the governments of the Council of Europe member states on 1 March, I sent a second letter to 37 member states, and requested additional information and clarifications on a number of specific issues.

...

The information received is being analysed. A vast majority of governments provided complete, precise and substantive replies, and we now begin to have a very clear picture of the situation. A complete assessment of the replies will take another couple of weeks. The replies will eventually be made public, together with my final report which will include proposals for intergovernmental action at the Council of Europe level.

Meanwhile, we can already draw two important conclusions.

First, the second batch of replies confirmed that virtually none of our member states have proper legislative and administrative measures to effectively protect individuals against violations of human rights committed by agents of friendly foreign security services operating on their territory. It looks as if the analysis of laws and administrative practices regulating the use of civil aircraft will lead to a similar conclusion. Some governments are trying to remedy the situation by asking for diplomatic assurances, a method which in my view has not proven to be adequate and to provide the level of positive protection required by the European Convention of Human Rights.

Second, on the basis of the information I have received so far, I am now in position to say that we no longer need to speak about “alleged” cases of rendition. I am not in a position to go into any further detail at the moment, but we have received official acknowledgment of “handing over” individuals to foreign officials through procedures which ignore the standards and safeguards required by the European Convention on Human Rights and other legal instruments of the Council of Europe. A few other replies contain inconsistencies which we are in the process of clarifying in direct contact with the authorities of the countries concerned.

I will stress again that the primary objective of my inquiry is not to look for a “smoking gun” of possible wrongdoing by our member states, but first and foremost to review and reinforce our legal arsenal for the protection of human rights.

If human rights of individuals have been violated – and this clearly cannot be excluded - this should be dealt with primarily by the competent authorities at the national level and eventually by the European Court of Human Rights.

...

http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/Files/PA-Sessions/April-2006...g.asp