Waiting game: No ruling on release of Abu Ghraib pics
Larisa Alexandrovna
The judge presiding over the Freedom of Information Act case on detainee abuse documents, including new videos and photos from Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, did not make a ruling today, RAW STORY has learned.
The hearing this afternoon at 3PM EST discussed the substantive part of the case after months of Defense and State Department stalling, including an unprecedented use of the FOIA statutes.
Last week, a District Court judge ruled against the DOD, State, et al, on redacting the hearings, the filings, as well as the evidence on which the hearings and filings were being argued.
Advertisement
RAW STORY has acquired the opening statement of the ACLU's Amrit Singh, who argued the case on behalf of the coalition of various groups filing the FOIA request. These groups include Veterans for Peace, Human Rights First, and fourteen major U.S. news organizations.
A source close to the hearings stated that the government's case was presented unchanged, concentrating on: "the meaning of accountability abroad, as well as the reactions the release of the documents might incite."
Your honor, I would like to begin by explaining why Plaintiffs are seeking the release of the Darby images. As described in Plaintiffs' own FOIA request, news reports of the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody date back to late 2002. Those reports were ignored by the government, and the American public at large. It was the leaking of visual images of prisoner abuse in April of 2004 that generated public debate and the pressure for reform. Today, more than a year since those images were leaked, questions about the extent of detainee abuse and high-level responsibility for that abuse remain unresolved. Public and Congressional debate on that subject continues. It was only a few weeks ago that Senator McCain proposed legislation for prohibiting 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' of detainees in U.S. custody abroad, and setting limits on permissible interrogation techniques. That legislation has not been passed.
In this context, Plaintiffs seek the release of the Darby images for four related sets of reasons: First, as the best evidence of what actually happened, these images make concrete the scope and severity of the abuse that occurred at Abu Ghraib. Second, they shed light on whether the Abu Ghraib abuse was indeed aberrational as the government would have us believe, or whether it was similar to the abuse that we now know to have occurred elsewhere in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. Third, they provide information on the issue of high-level responsibility for the abuse. As set out in our brief, we have reason to believe that some of what is depicted in the Darby images is related to techniques authorized by high-ranking officials. Fourth, the Darby images convey in an immediate manner the consequences of suspending protections owed to detainees held in US custody abroad, thus informing legislative efforts in this regard.
The government cannot dissociate itself from the conduct depicted in the Darby images by attributing it to a few rogue soldiers. No matter how un-American that conduct is, the fact remains that numerous detainees were abused while they were in United States custody. In effect, your honor, the government stands before you today telling you that its own conduct as depicted in the Darby images is so reprehensible that the American people cannot know the truth of it.
