EU report on CIA extraordinary rendition and black prison

by anon Wed Jun 07, 2006 12:45

Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly rapporteur Dick Marty today revealed what he called a global ''spider’s web'' of CIA detentions and transfers and listed seven Council of Europe member states which could be held responsible, in varying degrees, for violations of the rights of named individuals by colluding in these operations. In a 67-page explanatory memorandum to his report, made public in Paris today at a meeting of the Assembly’s Legal Affairs Committee, he said: ''It is now clear… that authorities in several European countries actively participated with the CIA in these unlawful activities. Other countries ignored them knowingly, or did not want to know.'' (more ...)

Video of press conference (available around 4pm) http://assembly.coe.int/

Failte Ireland

by Farmer Palmer Wed Jun 07, 2006 13:20

Ireland is expected to be one of 14 European countries to be named in a report by the Council of Europe on so-called rendition flights.

See also http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5054426.stm

by MichaelY - iawm Wed Jun 07, 2006 13:36

Below please find paragraphs 280-288 of the 'Conclusion' part of the Report. Ireland has been named, as illustrated in the map above, as a stop-over....and it is in the illustrious company of our EU partners: Portugal, Greece and our best friends the UK. It is noteworthy that in par 284, that while the authorship of the barbaric web is clearly put on the shoulders of the US, the Report notes"it is only through the intentional or grossly negligent collusion of the European partners that this “web” was able to spread also over Europe".

Enjoy:

280. Our analysis of the CIA 'rendition' programme has revealed a network that resembles a 'spider’s web' spun across the globe. The analysis is based on official information provided by national and international air traffic control authorities, as well as on other information including from sources inside intelligence services, in particular the American. This 'web', shown in the graphic239, is composed of several landing points, which we have subdivided into different categories, and which are linked up among themselves by civilian planes used by the CIA or military aircraft.

281. These landing points are used for various purposes that range from aircraft stopovers to refuel during a mission to staging points used for the connection of different 'rendition circuits' that we have identified and where “rendition units” can rest and prepare missions. We have also marked the points where there are known detention centres (Guantanamo Bay, Kabul and Baghdad…) as well as points where we believe we have been able to establish that pick-ups of rendition victims took place.

282. In two European countries only (Romania and Poland), there are two other landing points that remain to be explained. Whilst these do not fall into any of the categories described above, several indications have us believe that they are likely to form part of the ’rendition circuits’240. These landings therefore do not form part of the 98% of CIA flights that are used solely for logistical purposes241, but rather belong to the 2% of flights that concern us the most. These corroborated facts strengthen the presumption – already based on other elements - that these landings are detainee drop-off points that are near to secret detention centres.

283. Analysis of the network’s functioning and of ten individual cases allows us to make a number of conclusions both about human rights violations – some of which continue – and about the responsibilities of some Council of Europe member States.

284. It must be emphasised that this report is indeed addressed to the Council of Europe Member states. The United States, an observer state of our Organisation, actually created this reprehensible network, which we criticise in light of the values shared on both sides of the Atlantic. But we also believe to have established that it is only through the intentional or grossly negligent collusion of the European partners that this “web” was able to spread also over Europe.

285. The impression which some Governments tried to create at the beginning of this debate – that Europe was a victim of secret CIA plots – does not seem to correspond to reality. It is now clear – although we are still far from having established the whole truth - that authorities in several European countries actively participated with the CIA in these unlawful activities. Other countries ignored them knowingly, or did not want to know.

286. In the draft resolution, which sums up this report’s conclusions, I have not directly named the countries responsible simply because there is not enough room in such a text to adequately develop the nuances of each individual case. In addition, we only know part of the truth so far, and other countries may still turn out to be implicated in light of future research or revelations. This explanatory note, however, explains the discovered facts in far greater detail. Finally, the purpose of this report is not to attribute ‘grades’ to different member states, but to try to understand what really happened throughout Europe and to stop certain violations shown from reoccurring in future. I would add that a key element seems to be the urgent need to improve the international response to the threat of terrorism. This response presently appears today as largely inadequate and insufficiently coordinated.

287. Whilst hard evidence, at least according to the strict meaning of the word, is still not forthcoming, a number of coherent and converging elements indicate that secret detention centres have indeed existed and unlawful inter-state transfers have taken place in Europe. I do not set myself up to act as a criminal court, because this would require evidence beyond reasonable doubt. My assessment rather reflects a conviction based upon careful examination of balance of probabilities, as well as upon logical deductions from clearly established facts. It is not intended to pronounce that the authorities of these countries are ‘guilty’ for having tolerated secret detention sites, but rather it is to hold them ‘responsible’ for failing to comply with the positive obligation to diligently investigate any serious allegation of fundamental rights violations.

288. In this sense, it must be stated that to date, the following member States could be held responsible, at varying degrees, which are not always settled definitively, for violations of the rights of specific persons identified below (respecting the chronological order as far as possible):

- Sweden, in the cases of Ahmed Agiza and Mohamed Alzery ;

- Bosnia-Herzegovina, in the cases of Lakhdar Boumediene, Mohamed Nechle, Hadj Boudella, Belkacem Bensayah, Mustafa Ait Idir and Saber Lahmar ( the “Algerian six“) ;

- The United Kingdom in the cases of Bisher Al-Rawi, Jamil El-Banna and Binyam Mohamed ;

- Italy, in the cases of Abu Omar and Maher Arar ;

- “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia“, in the case of Khaled El-Masri ;

- Germany, in the cases of Abu Omar, of the “Algerian six”, and Khaled El-Masri ;

- Turkey, in the case of the “Algerian six”.

289. Some of these above mentioned states, and others, could be held responsible for collusion – active or passive (in the sense of having tolerated or having been negligent in fulfilling the duty to supervise) - involving secret detention and unlawful inter-state transfers of a non specified number of persons whose identity so far remains unknown:

- Poland and Romania, concerning the running of secret detention centres;

- Germany, Turkey, Spain and Cyprus for being ’staging points’ for flights involving the unlawful transfer of detainees;

- Ireland, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Greece and Italy for being ‘stopovers’ for flights involving the unlawful transfer of detainees.

by cafe Wed Jun 07, 2006 13:58

Labour Party representative to the Council of Europe, Eamon Gilmore, has said the Government cannot maintain the pretence that it is blameless regarding extraordinary rendition flights through Shannon Airport after the Council named Ireland as one of 14 countries that colluded with the CIA on these illegal flights.

Deputy Gilmore commented, “Today’s report from Council Rapporteur, Senator Dick Marty, is the latest damning evidence on the extent to which European Member States have been complicit in the US Governments’ illegal activities in Iraq. Specifically, it accuses Ireland of facilitating the passage and detention of unknown persons.

“The Government continually refused to inspect these planes, preferring to take the word of the US Government instead.

“Yet this report, following a separate Council of Europe report last March and numerous and repeated public criticisms from Irish and international human rights organisations, decimates the legitimacy of the Government’s line.

“Senator Marty clearly states that Ireland is among those countries who simply chose to ‘ignore’ these flights, rather than confront their brutal and ugly reality. Feigning ignorance is a pathetic excuse and the Government must admit this.

“It is clear that Member States are unable or unwilling to control foreign intelligence and security agencies such as the CIA. A new approach must now be devised to ensure a means of protecting against the alleged torture, ill-treatment and illegal transport of detainees by the US authorities.

“Given the importance of Senator Marty’s report, I will seek a full debate on its contents and conclusions at the next session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe at the end of this month.”

by anon Wed Jun 07, 2006 14:32

The German intelligence agency is admitting that it knew about the rendition by the US of a German citizen about two years ago, media reports say.

http://euobserver.com/9/21757

by anon Wed Jun 07, 2006 15:49

Amnesty International Irish Section and the Irish Centre for Human Rights held a seminar in Dublin on May 9 where international human rights experts discussed the obligations of states that have not adequately recognised their responsibility where their territory may have been used to facilitate renditions.

Panelists included UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, Legal Advisor to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mona Rishmawi, and member of the UN Human Rights Committee and Co-Director of the Centre for Human Rights, University of Nottingham, Michael O’Flaherty.

It concluded that a state is not entitled to insist that there must be clear evidence of a specific detainee on board an aircraft before it will act. If there are reasonable grounds to believe that in certain defined contexts there is a general risk that the human rights of certain passengers will be violated, states must act.

"States could make overflight permission conditional upon respect for express human rights clauses. Compliance with procedures for obtaining authorisation for overflight or landings must be strictly monitored. Whenever necessary, the right to search civil planes must be exercised," said Amnesty International Irish Section Secretary General, Colm Ó Cuanacháin.

The seminar concluded that, where a state permits the transit of a foreign aircraft that it knows or ought to know is en route to or returning from a rendition mission, but is not actually carrying detainees at that time, the state may bear some responsibility and jurisdiction. This has significant implications for Ireland, which appears to have operated on the premise that its responsibility and jurisdiction are engaged only where there is clear evidence of detainees physically transiting Irish territory. It also has implications for the US assurances Ireland has requested and received, which appear to address only such direct transfers.

Rather than waiting for information to be uncovered by the media and non-government organisations, states should disclose the full extent of their actions and practices in combating and investigating terrorism, or in facilitating other states to do so, and offer explanations as to how these actions and practices comply with international law.

"Today’s report is not the end of the debate. As the United States comes under increasing pressure to close Guantanámo, other members of the international community must decide whether they are on the side of human rights and the law or narrow political expediency," said Deputy-Director at the Irish Centre for Human Rights, Dr Vinodh Jaichand.

PDF: Full Report: Renditions and the Law (renditions seminar report may 2006.pdf - 152.36 kB) http://www.amnesty.ie/user/content/download/4489/23278/...6.pdf
PDF: Backround Paper (renditions seminar may 2006 background paper.pdf - 46.53 kB) http://www.amnesty.ie/user/content/download/4487/23272/...r.pdf

Previous reports

by Seán Ryan Wed Jun 07, 2006 16:25

Tis gratifying to see the work of Tim Hourigan, Conor Cregan, Ed Horgan and others like them, finally get some of the attention it merits.

Bertie should announce a date for a general election, and then hand himeslf and the others complicit in international crimes against humanity over to the relevant authorities.

by anon Thu Jun 08, 2006 16:19

The American response describe the report as press clippings but one of those press clippings was a semior CIA official concerns over the European black prisons which led to their closure, so maybe that sorta thing works.

Bertie Ahern response is 'if anybody had any evidence they should produce it'
and ours is "Under the European Convention of Human Rights, governments are not only obliged not to do these things, they are obliged to put in place legislation to make it impossible for these things to happen," quoting Mr Davis' spokesman, Matjaz Gruden."

Dail on CoE renditions report
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=DAL20060607...ge=11
Aengus O'SFetc ask some interesting questions