No Canadian rights for Afghan prisoners
Published: March 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM
OTTAWA, March 12 (UPI) -- Afghan prisoners captured by Canadian troops don't have the same rights Canadians do in their own country, a federal judge ruled in Ottawa Wednesday.
Judge Anne Mactavish ruled against an appeal by Amnesty International to stop Canadian troops from transferring Afghan detainees to the Afghanistan government, which the rights group claims has tortured some of the prisoners.
Canadian troops stopped turning over prisoners to Afghan authorities Nov. 6 when abuse allegations arose, but resumed the practice last month. Statements said the officials responsible for torture had been identified and suspended, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported.
Amnesty International said that under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- that forbids handing over prisoners to countries where they would face torture or capital punishment -- Afghans deserved human rights.
Hours earlier, Canada's civilian-run military police watchdog announced plans to hold public hearings into the military's detainee transfer policy in Afghanistan, the report said.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/03/12/no_canadian_rights_for_afghan_prisoners/1641/
Judge Anne Mactavish ruled against an appeal by Amnesty International to stop Canadian troops from transferring Afghan detainees to the Afghanistan government, which the rights group claims has tortured some of the prisoners.
Canadian troops stopped turning over prisoners to Afghan authorities Nov. 6 when abuse allegations arose, but resumed the practice last month. Statements said the officials responsible for torture had been identified and suspended, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported.
Amnesty International said that under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- that forbids handing over prisoners to countries where they would face torture or capital punishment -- Afghans deserved human rights.
Hours earlier, Canada's civilian-run military police watchdog announced plans to hold public hearings into the military's detainee transfer policy in Afghanistan, the report said.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/03/12/no_canadian_rights_for_afghan_prisoners/1641/
Stumble It!
Article 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/prisonerwar.htm
.....
Why would they have need of rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights, when they are in Afghanistan and protected under the Geneva Conventions?
We found evidence that they may be subject to torture, we stopped transferring them the the local authority as is required under the Geneva Conventions. When we saw they no longer faced possible torture, we started transferring them again to the legal local authority.
Where is the problem?
The attempt was made because we are handing people over to torture, regardless of the Geneva Conventions.
We didn't *know* if they were being tortured. If we suspected, we had no proof. As soon as we had the slightest proof - we stopped transferring them until we could confirm they were not to be subjected to torture. (Also in the Geneva Conventions).
I guess I'm just confused as to why Amnesty International is trying to make our troops do exactly what it appears they were doing all along.
If you say so Doc, but everyone knows what's going on in Afghanistan. It's an ugly war of conquest, and in all of these wars people are always brutally treated and murdered. It's been happening every day in Afghanistan since the war started.
The Geneva Conventions don't mean a damn thing because it's an exclusive tool of the main world powers (currently the USA) therefore the only war criminals that ever go to trial are the exceptionally weak who are not a member of the club.
Whatever arrangement was made between Canada and the US of Afghanistan, it was done to hide the torture and abuse from the troops a little better so that there would at least be plausible deniability to set nerves at ease and allow the transfers to continue abetted.
"We gave refugees the same right as Canadian citizens under the charter."
Rev, you are mistaken. Refugees were not given the same rights as Canadian citizens. You must know of the secret trials and infinite detention process here in Canada that flaunts the Charter and the norms of justice.
I was referring only to the single decision, rearguard. From what I've heard in interviews, that was the precedent that Amnesty International was hoping the courts would take into consideration.
There are actually a lot of questions as to what we knew and didn't know, going all the way back to when we were handing prisoners over to US torture. Of course everybody understands that the Afghan prison system is brutal and that torture is common, so claiming that we didn't know is being more than a little dishonest.
Not that dishonesty is unfamiliar to this government. They haven't told the truth about what's going on with the prisoners yet. We may not know the details, but we do know that we are being lied to.
There is still more than a little uncertainty as to what has changed that suddenly makes it okay to turn prisoners over. The Military Police Complaints Commission is still trying to find out what's going on, and are now seeking the power of subpoena, because the Harperites refuse to give them unedited documents. The Commission is part of the government and has the proper security clearances, so he only reason to give them edited documents is an attempt to hide something...likely something politically volatile for the Conservatives.