Re: Gauntanamo, Living in Legal Limbo
Date: April 17, 2004
"Guantanamo
issue took two years to reach UN commission
GENEVA: The situation of some 660 prisoners living in legal limbo at the US
naval base in Guantanamo was brought up by Havana on Thursday before the United
Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva , shortly after a resolution condemning
Cuba's human rights record narrowly passed.
The Cuban delegation urged the Commission, the highest UN authority on human
rights, to investigate the conditions in which the non-US citizens of around
40 different nationalities are being held.
Most of the men, who the United States describes as Al Qaeda and Taliban suspects,
have been held at Guantanamo Bay in southeastern Cuba since January 2002.
The Cuban petition on what it described as the "concentration camp"
at Guantanamo was made public a few minutes after the commission approved, by
a vote of 22 to 21, with 10 abstentions, the declaration criticizing the human
rights situation in Cuba, which was presented by Honduras.
Few governments have expressed concern over the conditions under which the detainees
are being held in Guantanamo, which rights watchdog Amnesty International described
this week as "a major human rights scandal that has widespread implications
for the whole world".
Javier Zzqiga, senior director at Amnesty, said "This policy promotes a
world in which arbitrary and unchallengeable detentions become acceptable."
The Chilean delegation was the only one of the 53 that make up the commission
to mention its concern over the situation in Guantanamo during the debate on
the resolution against Cuba.
Chilean representative Juan Martabit said the detainees were being held at the
navy base without knowledge of their legal status, with no formal charges having
been filed against them, and with no right to a legal defence.
He also pointed out that the foreign ministers of Organization of American States
(OAS) member countries had stated that the war on terrorism must be carried
out with full respect for the law, human rights, and the institutions of democracy,
But Richard S. Williamson, the head of the US delegation to the commission,
said the same "law of armed conflict (that) governs the war between the
United States and (the) Al Qaeda" radical Muslim terrorist network applies
in the case of Guantanamo.
Williamson said: "The war was clearly declared on September 11, 2001 when
close to 3,000 innocent people were the victims of an evil, malicious and intentional
attack by a fanatical group with twisted political goals."
At the start of the commission's annual session, Williamson argued that "the
armed conflict falls under the rules for detention of enemy combatants",
who the United States has the authority to detain, "under the law of armed
conflict...for the duration of hostilities."
"This is not a human rights issue," he insisted. But Jakob Kellenberger,
president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), lamented after
meeting with senior officials in Washington three months ago that "two
years after the first prisoners arrived, they still face indefinite detention
beyond the reach of the law."
The ICRC, which oversees the Third Geneva Convention guaranteeing minimum standards
of treatment for prisoners of war, said last January that it had not yet seen
"concrete results" on concerns it expressed about the conditions in
which the detainees are held in Guantanamo, and the treatment they receive.
In January 2002, then UN high commissioner for human rights Mary Robinson told
Washington that the treatment of the detainees must be in line with the Third
Geneva Convention.
Washington has denied the detainees prisoner of war status, and reserves the
right to try them in special military courts. Only a handful have been repatriated
so far.
The resolution presented by Cuba urges the commission to demand that the United
States provide "the information necessary to clarify the conditions and
legal status" of the detainees, and to put an end to the denounced "violations".
The proposal also calls for the special rapporteurs on torture and the independence
of judges and lawyers, and the working group on arbitrary detention to report
on the situation of the prisoners in Guantanamo.
Despite the frequent clashes between Havana and the United States, Cuba had
not raised the subject of Guantanamo at the United Nations until recently. The
US enclave in Guantanamo Bay dates back to a treaty signed by the two countries
in 1903, and to a 1934 agreement that leased the area to the United States "in
perpetuity".
Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Pirez Roque said in Havana that his government
would invite Honduras, which presented the resolution condemning Cuba's human
rights record, to co-sponsor the Guantanamo petition.
It also said it would ask the 22 countries that voted in favour of the declaration
against Cuba to back the proposal on Guantanamo. The statement criticising Cuba
was approved by the United States and the European members of the commission:
Armenia, Austria, Croatia, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands,
Sweden and the United Kingdom.
Australia, Japan, South Korea and seven Latin American countries - Chile, Costa
Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and Peru - also voted
in favour.
It was opposed by Bahrain, Burkina Faso, China, Cuba, the Democratic Republic
of Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia,
Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Togo, Ukraine and
Zimbabwe.
Argentina, Brazil, Bhutan, Eritrea, Gabon, Mauritania, Nepal, Paraguay, Sri
Lanka and Uganda abstained. Pirez Roque said the resolution against Havana demonstrated
"double standards and subordination to the interests of the US government
by the countries that lent their support to this scheme against Cuba."
But unlike similar declarations approved by the commission in the past, this
year's does not explicitly condemn the government of Fidel Castro. It deplores
the lengthy prison sentences handed down to 75 dissidents last year, and calls
on Cuba to ensure freedom of expression and religion and to start a dialogue
with Cuban political groups and dissidents, to develop democratic institutions
and guarantee respect for civil liberties.
Pirez Roque pointed out that "not a single African, Arab or developing
nation in Asia" voted in favour of the motion against Cuba, which he said
was drafted by the US State Department.
On the contrary, he said, the resolution was backed by "developed and rich
countries and minor allies of the United States" and by a group of Latin
American governments "that are incapable of acting independently"
of Washington.
In Havana's view, the "merit" of the abstentions is even greater in
the case of a group of African nations that it said were the targets of pressure
and blackmail from Washington, including threats to withdraw economic aid and
credit.
Unlike previous years, however, the foreign minister did not directly lash out
against Latin American presidents and governments that voted in favour of the
resolution against Havana.
Elizardo Sanchez, a leading Cuban dissident and head of the Cuban Commission
for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, noted that "the great majority
of the countries that supported the resolution have voted against Washington's
(40-year-old) embargo against Cuba" in the UN General Assembly. -Dawn/The
Inter Press News Service.
©1996-2002 Hi Pakistan"
Peruse More InterNetwork Notices
Peruse Older InterNetwork Notices
DISCLAIMER:
The content of this message is the sole responsibility of the originator.
Posting of this message to the POW-MIA InterNetwork© does not show AII
POW-MIA endorsement. It is provided so you may make an informed decision.
AIIPOWMIAI is not associated in any capacity with any United States Government
agency or entity, nor with any non-governmental or private organization.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted
work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for nonprofit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
]
Archive ©AII POW-MIA