Congressman John Conyers
will be issuing a letter cosigned by roughly 50 House
members calling for a special prosecutor to investigate
claims that the U.S. has violated the War Crimes Act
at secret detention facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan
and Guantanamo Bay, RAW
STORY has learned.
The following letter has been issued.
###
May 12, 2005
The Honorable Alberto R. Gonzales
Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Mr. Attorney General:
We are writing to request that you appoint a special
counsel to investigate whether high-ranking officials
within the Bush Administration violated the War Crimes
Act, 18 U.S.C. 2441, or the Anti-Torture Act, 18 U.S.C.
2340 by allowing the use of torture techniques banned
by domestic and international law at recognized and
secret detention sites in Iraq, Afghanistan Guantanamo
Bay and elsewhere.
One year and 10 investigations after we first learned
about the atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib, there
has yet to be a comprehensive, neutral and objective
investigation with prosecutorial authority of who is
ultimately responsible for the abuses there and elsewhere.
While more than 130 low-ranking officers and enlisted
soldiers have been disciplined or face courts-martial
for the abuses that occurred, there have been no criminal
charges against high-ranking officials. Yet the pattern
of abuse across several countries did not result from
the acts of individual soldiers who broke the rules.
It resulted from decisions made by senior U.S. officials
to bend, ignore, or cast rules aside. If the United
States is to wipe away the stain of Abu Ghraib, it needs
to investigate those at the top who ordered or condoned
torture. As a result, it is in our interest to finally
show the world that we are taking these matters seriously
and resolving them free of political taint.
Some of us previously asked Attorney General Ashcroft
to appoint a special counsel to investigate these abuses
on May 20, 2004. Unfortunately, we received no answer
to our request. The need for a special counsel is now
more important than ever as the Administration and military
have repeatedly exonerated high-ranking officials, or
declined to even investigate their actions, even as
other official investigations linked the policy decisions
by these officials to the crimes that occurred at Abu
Ghraib. The Administration's haphazard and disjointed
approach to these investigations appears to have insulated
those in command and prevented a full account of the
actions and abuses from being determined.
As you know, under Department of Justice regulations,
the Attorney General must appoint a special counsel
when (1) a "criminal investigation of a person
or matter is warranted," (2) the investigation
"by a United States Attorney Office or litigating
Division of the Department of Justice would present
a conflict of interest for the Department," and
(3) "it would be in the public interest to appoint
an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility
for the matter."1 In the present case, all three
requirements have been met.
First, federal criminal laws are clearly implicated.
The Anti-Torture Act criminalizes acts of torture -
including attempts to commit torture and conspiracy
to commit an act of torture - occurring outside the
United States' territorial jurisdiction regardless of
the citizenship of the perpetrator or victim.2 The Geneva
Conventions generally prohibit "violence to life
and persons," "outrages upon personal dignity,"
and "humiliating and degrading treatment."3
Violations of the Geneva Conventions also constitute
a violation of U.S. federal criminal law under the War
Crimes Act.4 The Administration has acknowledged on
several occasions that the United States is bound by
the Geneva Conventions with respect to Iraqi5 and Taliban
prisoners,6 and that a violation of the Conventions
would invite prosecution under the War Crimes Act.7
Numerous investigations have uncovered such violations.
The Taguba report found instances of "sadistic,
blatant and wanton criminal abuses" of prisoners.8
The Army's Inspector General's report found 94 incidents
of detainee abuse at detention sites in Afghanistan
and Iraq.9 And, the Schlesinger report confirmed five
instances in which detainees died as a result of abuse
by U.S. personnel during interrogations.10 The repudiation
of the August 2002 memorandum you wrote as White House
Counsel in December of 2004 suggests even the Administration
realizes its policies contributed to actions which violated
federal criminal law.11
Therefore, given the Administration's concession that
the Geneva Conventions apply to Iraqi and Taliban prisoners,
given its concession in the Gonzalez memo that a violation
of the Conventions would also constitute a violation
of federal criminal law, and given the flagrant violations
of the Conventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo
Bay which have been confirmed by official investigations,
it is clear that a prima facie violation of federal
criminal law exists. It is also evident that high-ranking
Administration officials, including the Defense Secretary,
as well as high-ranking military officials, may have
authorized these actions and are potentially subject
to criminal prosecution as well.
Second, there is an obvious conflict of interest. A
special counsel is necessary not only because high-ranking
Administration officials, including Cabinet members,
are implicated, but also because you personally, and
the Department of Justice generally, may have participated
in this conspiracy to violate the War Crimes Act. It
has been confirmed that the Department of Justice's
Office of Legal Counsel, and you yourself as White House
Counsel, encouraged the president to withhold Geneva
Convention protections from Afghanistan and Guantanamo
Bay detainees. If the conflict of interest provisions
in your regulations mean anything, it is that when the
Attorney General may have contributed to the abuses
that were committed, the Department of Justice has no
business conducting the investigation and should instead
turn to a special counsel.
Finally, there can be no doubt that the public interest
will be served by a broad and independent investigation
into both the allegations of abuse at U.S. detention
sites as well as the role of high-ranking officials
in authorizing and allowing these abuses. To date, a
number of investigations into allegations of abuse at
United States detention sites have been conducted, including
ten official investigations. These investigations concluded
that the leadership failure of officers such as Lt.
Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, formerly the senior commander
in Iraq, contributed to the prisoner abuse.
For example, the Army Inspector General and former Defense
Secretary James Schlesinger found in separate reports
that the policies issued by Lt. Gen. Sanchez and his
subsequent actions once the abuses at Abu Ghraib were
known contributed to the perpetration of these abuses.
The Schlesinger investigation also found that other
top military officials were responsible, concluding,
"There is both institutional and personal responsibility
at higher levels."12 Similarly, the Kern-Fay-Jones
report concluded that the actions of Sanchez and his
most senior deputies, such as Maj. Gen. Walter Wojdakowski,
"did indirectly contribute" to some abuses.13
However, these inquiries were not empowered to impose
punishments on those it found culpable, and they were
not empowered to examine the role of high-ranking officials,
including members of the Administration, in the perpetuation
of these abuses.14 And, in spite of these findings,
many of the reports refused to hold these high-ranking
officials culpable. In fact, we recently learned the
Army absolved four top officers, including Lt. Gen.
Sanchez, of wrongdoing. To date, only one high-ranking
military officer has been punished as a result of these
inquiries, and many view her punishment as a mere slap
on the wrist. As a result, it is not yet clear to the
world that the United States is taking these abuses
seriously.
The public interest demands we determine who is ultimately
responsible for these abuses. While Private Lynndie
England and other low-ranking officers have pled guilty,
those who ordered and authorized their actions appear
to have been protected by the military and this Administration.
Because so many high level officials, including you,
have been implicated in these events, the only way to
ensure impartiality is through the appointment of a
Special Counsel. Indeed, our nation's integrity is at
stake. We must reassure the world that we will fairly
and independently pursue legal violations wherever they
occur.
We await your response on this important matter. At
no point during this Administration has a Special Counsel
been appointed.15 Please contact us through Perry Apelbaum
or Ted Kalo of the Judiciary Staff at 2142 Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 if you have any
questions about this request.
Sincerely,
1. Rep. Tammy Baldwin
2. Rep. Sanford Bishop
3. Rep. Earl Blumenauer
4. Rep. Corrine Brown
5. Rep. Julia Carson
6. Rep. John Conyers
7. Rep. Elijah Cummings
8. Rep. A. Davis
9. Rep. S. Davis
10. Rep. Diana DeGette
11. Rep. Anna Eshoo
12. Rep. Barney Frank
13. Rep. Raul Grijalva
14. Rep. Luis Guitierrez
15. Rep. Maurice Hinchey
16. Rep. Michael Honda
17. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee
18. Rep. Ron Kind
19. Rep. Dennis Kucinich
20. Rep. Barbara Lee
21. Rep. Zoe Lofgren
22. Rep. Carolyn Maloney
23. Rep. Betty McCollum
24. Rep. Jim McDermott
25. Rep. James McGovern
26. Rep. Gregory Meeks
27. Rep. James Moran
28. Rep. Jerrold Nadler
29. Rep. James Oberstar
30. Rep. John Olver
31. Rep. Frank Pallone
32. Rep. Donald Payne
33. Rep. Tom Price
34. Rep. Martin Sabo
35. Rep. Linda Sanchez
36. Rep. Bernard Sanders
37. Rep. Janice Schakowsky
38. Rep. Bobby Scott
39. Rep. Jose Serrano
40. Rep. Louise Slaughter
41. Rep. Hilda Solis
42. Rep. Fortney Stark
43. Rep. Ellen Tauscher
44. Rep. Mark Udall
45. Rep. Chris VanHollen
46. Rep. Maxine Waters
47. Rep. Diane Watson
48. Rep. Melvin Watt
49. Rep. Robert Wexler
50. Rep. Lynn Woolsey
51. Rep. David Wu
