BYBEE TORTURE MEMO PDF

When we talk today of the “torture memos,” most of us think about the later memoranda, like the infamous “Bybee Memo” of August 1, Another Tortured Memo from Jay Bybee. Nine years after he left his post as Director of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in the George W. Bush. The Bybee Memo Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales We conclude that for an act to constitute torture as defined in Section , it must inflict pain that is .

Author: Voodooramar Daigul
Country: Togo
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Art
Published (Last): 22 December 2009
Pages: 204
PDF File Size: 11.94 Mb
ePub File Size: 6.44 Mb
ISBN: 669-6-72454-462-7
Downloads: 27703
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kigagis

How could its opinions reflect such bad judgement, be so poorly reasoned, and have such terrible tone? Other bybde were forced to stand spread meno while an interrogator kicked them “continuously on the inside of the legs. Hasan Subasic was brutally beaten and witnessed the beatings of other prisoners, including the beating and death of one of his fellow prisoners and the beating of Hadzialijagic in which he was tied upside down and beaten.

Even the Nazi regime did all it could to convince itself that all its actions were torthre, and as a consequence, the mountains of paperwork they created were of great use to prosecutors at Nuremberg. The War with Al Qaeda At the outset, we should make clear the nature of the threat presently posed to the nation. Bybee inviting him to testify before the Judiciary Committee in connection with his role in writing legal memoranda authorizing the use of harsh interrogation techniques while serving as the Assistant Attorney General of the Office of Legal Counsel OLC.

One could argue that such a definition represented an attempt to to indicate the good of of obtaining information — no matter what the circumstances — could not justify an act of torture.

In the absence of a catchall provision, the most natural reading of the predicate acts listed in Section 2 A – D is that Congress intended it to be exhaustive.

If the President is confronted with an unforeseen attack on the territory and people of the United States, or other immediate, dangerous threat to American interests and security, it is his constitutional responsibility to respond to that threat with whatever means are necessary. Moreover, their “good faith” defence against criminal liability for torture rested meom two presumptions, that interrogators would not exceed the severe physical and severe and prolonged mental pain thresholds for torture as defined by Yoo and Bybee, and, even if they did, that it would not constitute torture unless these physical and psychological harms were the precise objectives of the interrogators.

  GURPS CELTIC MYTH PDF

Thus, if Congress explicitly has made clear that violation of a statute cannot be outweighed by the harm avoided, courts cannot recognize the necessity defense.

The Torture Documents – The Rendition Project

Archived from the original PDF on There are two cases in which U. Because “pain or suffering” is single concept for the purposes of “severe mental pain or suffering,” it should likewise be read as a single concept for the purposes of severe physical pain or suffering.

He was threatened with death, blindfolded and beaten while handcuffed and fettered. And, of course, the grant of war power includes all that is necessary and proper for carrying those powers into execution. In finding that Vuckovic inflicted severe physical pain on Hadzialijagic, the court unsurprisingly focused on the beating in which Vuckovic tied Hadzialijagic upside down and beat him. House of Representatives House Committee on the Judiciary.

The Bradbury memos were issued in after the CIA had sought approval from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel for harsher techniques than had tortkre been totrure by the Bybee memos.

By including this latter set of treatment as cruel, inhuman or degrading, the court appeared to take the view that acts that would otherwise constitute torture fall outside that definition because of the absence of the particular purposes listed in the TVPA and the treaty.

A memo on torture to John Yoo | Vincent Iacopino | Opinion | The Guardian

Further, the CAT contains an additonal provision that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other pubic emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. The Senate ratified CAT with this understanding, and as is obvious from the text, Congress codified this understanding almost verbatim in the criminal statute.

  KEBAIKAN PPSMI PDF

First, the defense is not limited to certain types of harms. At both schools, he taught constitutional law, administrative law, and civil procedure. Waterboarding is Never Acceptable Regardless of the Circumstances”. Accessed September 2, As our Office has consistently held during this Administration and previous Administrations, Congress lacks authority under Article I to set the terms and conditions under which the President may exercise his authority as Commander in Chief tortur control [Page 35] the conduct of operations daring a war.

Navigation menu

Constitutional Law in this area was strained and indefensible. If intelligence and other information support the conclusion that an attack is increasingly certain, then the necessity for the interrogation will be reasonable. The September 11 attacks have already triggered that authority, as recognized both, under domestic and international law.

Archived from the original PDF on November 6, Presidential Power in a Time of Terror. Constitution in order to constitute cruel, inhuman, or torturr treatment or punishment.

Current judges of the United States courts of appeals. Retrieved 24 May As we have seen, the Bush understanding as codified in Section reaches only extreme acts. That authority is at its height in the middle of a war.

The notion that grand jury testimony should be secret dates back to at least the seventeenth century. Archived from the original on May 2, In crafting such a definition, the state parties also were acutely aware of the distinction they drew between torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.