Formal communication filed to the UN against NATO Supreme Commander General Craddock
The complaint is submitted on the eve of NATO's 60th Anniversary Summit, following a conference organized by CCR, FIDH, and ECCHR on the nature and significance of NATO's commitment to international human rights. These organizations find it deeply problematic that a senior military officer at NATO is a man responsible for world-decried human rights violations that took place under his watch prior to taking the NATO post. It is illustrative of NATO's failure to break from unlawful practices and policies implemented in the name of the U.S.-led "War on Terror."
As early as 2002, detainees at the U.S. Detention Center at Guantánamo Bay have participated in hunger strikes in order to non-violently oppose their subjection to unlawful conditions and inhumane treatment. The hunger strikers protest in order to demand recognition of and respect for their legal and human rights, which include a review of their detention through access to due process and a fair trial, and the right not to be subjected to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment.
The response of U.S. officials at Guantánamo has been the formal approval and implementation of a regime of force-feeding as an effective deterrent against these protests. Actions at Guantánamo involve active coercion by the Instant (or Immediate) Response Force (IRF), including the use of force, the tying down of limbs and the forcible insertion of a nasogastric tube to a detainee who is strapped into a restraint chair. Furthermore, there is little to no consideration for medical needs or standards. After approximately 1.5 liters of fluid are pumped into their stomachs, prisoners have often reacted by vomiting, potentially substantial amounts of blood. They are typically kept strapped into the restraint chairs for an hour after the force-feeding to avoid further purging. Sedatives and anesthetics are not provided while the same tube, without having been sanitized properly and shared by many victims, is inserted and removed twice a day, repeated until the victim voluntarily accepts oral food once again.
Clearly, this practice constitutes a serious violation of international law including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Art. 5), the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (Art. 7) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment (CAT) (Art. 1). In some situations, such as artificial and involuntary artificial force-feeding, the practice is considered constitutional if there is medical necessity, certain protocols are followed and the methods are not unduly severe. This is not such a case. In the cases of the Guantánamo detainees on whose behalf the human rights organizations have submitted these communications, force-feeding practices did not comply with these standards. Moreover, they were clearly and evidently aimed at putting an end to the hunger strikes, were excessively violent, and deliberately caused extreme pain, suffering and humiliation. The human rights organizations argue that this unlawful treatment, not to mention other human rights abuses, amounts to torture as described in the CAT.
It has also been alleged that certain tactics have been deliberately used to offend and violate cultural or religious beliefs. For example, all-female IRF squads have been formed as part of a conscious policy aimed at taunting and traumatizing Muslim detainees. There have also been cases of desecration of the Qur'an and forced shavings.
The brutal force-feeding of Guantánamo detainees amounts to torture, or at the very least, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment under international human rights law. In 2007, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that "repeated force-feeding, not prompted by valid medical reasons but rather with the aim of forcing the applicant to stop his protest, and performed in a manner whichunnecessarily exposed him to great physical pain and humiliation, can only be considered as torture" (Ciorap v. Moldova).
The World Medical Association (WMA) has denounced force-feeding practices on both medical and ethical grounds in the 1975 Declaration of Tokyo and the 1991 Declaration of Malta. "If a prisoner undergoing torture decided to protest against his plight by going on a hunger strike, a doctor should not be obliged to administer nourishment against the prisoner's will and thereby effectively revive him for more torture." In March 2006, a group of 263 doctors called on the US government to put at end to these practices.
It is for these reasons that on April 3 2009, the Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (CCR), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the National Litigation Project at Yale Law School, Appeal for Justice and the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), have collectively submitted a formal communication to the U.N. Special Rapporteurs on behalf of several Guantánamo victims of force-feeding and other human rights abuses. Mr. Al-Zahrani was known to have gone on hunger strike at least once for a period of six months. After the U.S. government had ordered the administration of the camp to stop the strike by any means, there is both information and belief that Al-Zahrani was subjected to abusive force-feeding with or without the use of a restraint chair.
Mr. Al-Salami, a "long and dedicated striker, perhaps being tube fed longer than any other detainee in the camp," was physically and emotionally abused during his force-feedings. After four years of protest, his final hunger strike ended on 3 June 2006, a week before his death. Both of these men have died at Guantánamo, likely as a direct or indirect result of the physical and psychological torture they endured. Medical records from several other prisoners have been gathered. Ahmed Zaid Salem Zuhair has been perhaps the longest continuous hunger striker and is no longer force-fed by medics but instead by a riot squad which behaves in a violent and medically unsound manner. He has gone as far as to protest by smearing himself in his own excrement. Yusuf Al-Shehri was told that "dying is not permitted" after a tube 50% larger and more painful to insert was used on him. Emad Hassan recounts the urinating, defecating, vomiting and bleeding that others had experienced. Isa al-Murbati describes feeling pain like a "knife in the stomach" after two large bags of liquid formula were quickly forced into his body.
Fawzi al-Odah stated that lozenges which were used to soothe victims' throats had been taken away, and that other ingredients would be mixed with the liquid formulas to cause diarrhea. Jum'ah al-Dossari was told by officers that if they challenge the U.S., the U.S. would challenge them back using these tactics.
UN Special Rapporteurs Manfred Nowak on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Anand Grover on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health, and Martin Scheinin on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism, have been called upon to begin a criminal investigation into the command of U.S. Army General Bantz John Craddock.
As Commander of the United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) from November 9, 2004 until October 18, 2006, Gen. Craddock oversaw all U.S. military operations in Central and South America and the Caribbean. Thus, Craddock was the link in the chain of command between Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Commander of the Joint Task Force Guantánamo (JTF-GTMO). His command over subordinate forces, namely the IRF at Guantánamo, included the authority and responsibility to give orders to, set policy for, and manage the affairs of forces under his control, and to remove and discipline personnel who were violating the rights of detainees.
Because of his official command responsibility over Guantánamo Bay Naval Station, he is effectively criminally responsible for the accounts of torture, prolonged arbitrary detention, force-feeding and inadequate medical care of detainees that occurred under his supervision. In accordance with the doctrine of command responsibility of superiors, which has been long recognized by national and international law, Craddock's knowledge of such actions, as well as his failure to take any measures against them or the perpetrators under his supervision, holds him personally liable. Craddock was not only aware of the use of force-feedings to discourage hunger strikes, but approved them himself and even tried to publicly justify them as "not inhumane." He joked that victims were able to choose the color of their feeding tubes and that the chair, which has been called a "padded cell on wheels" by its producers, was "pretty comfortable" and "not abusive."
Failure by a commander to report, investigate or punish a serious crime is itself a crime under customary international law. Gen. Craddock failed to report on, launch any investigation of, and/or punish his subordinates at Guantánamo who perpetrated these human rights abuses. On the contrary, he created a climate of impunity where professional military duties, as well as ethical, legal and medical standards were wholly discarded.
Neither the end of Gen. Craddock's tenure nor the recent change in government has changed these inhumane conditions at Guantánamo. Indeed, President Barack Obama has taken executive action and ordered the closing of the detention facility, but this new change will not come into effect until the end of 2009.
In a 23 February 2009 report, CCR noted that at least fifty men were participating in hunger strikes and refusing to leave their cells for force-feedings. As a result, IRF teams attacked and forcibly extracted them from their cells, and proceeded to drag them, beat them, step on their arms and twist their fingers, finally forcing them into a restraint chair to be force-fed.
There have been no domestic or international criminal investigations, commissions of inquiry or prosecution launched against General Craddock despite the preponderance of evidence. Thus, it is the authoritative role and duty of the UN Special Rapporteurs as defenders of international customary law to take legal action.
They have been asked to do the following:
(1) obtain information from the U.S. government about the allegations against Gen. Craddock as well as a response to those allegations,
(2) request that the U.S. Attorney General appoint an individual of unquestioned integrity, impartiality and independence to conduct a criminal investigation of the factual information behind Gen. Craddock's command and then initiate criminal proceedings in accordance with national and international laws and treaties, and
(3) formally appeal to the Obama administration to take urgent and necessary measures to put an immediate end to the torturous actions of force-feeding at the Guantánamo detention facility. Specifically, the new administration has been asked to ensure and provide proper and adequate independent medical treatment, prohibit and cease the use of restraint chairs, IRF teams and other violent methods, remove detainees from Camp V and VI where conditions are most inhumane and ensure that all staff is trained to respond to hunger strikes and other protests in compliance with international ethical standards.
It can only be hoped that the U.S. will uphold their campaign promise of change, and that authorities will respond by acknowledging these requests and agreeing to investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute General Craddock.