Arar Commission Report, FACTUAL BACKGROUND: VOLUME II, p.481:
[Canadian] Ambassador Kergin was advised [in a 11/6/2003 meeting with Fran Townsend] that the U.S. Government in removing Mr. Arar to Syria attached a condition that he not be harmed which was conveyed to the Syrians.
Sec. of State Rice, 12/6/2005:
"The United States has not transported anyone, and will not transport anyone, to a country when we believe he will be tortured. Where appropriate, the United States seeks assurances that transferred persons will not be tortured."
"Where appropriate" ?
That and other questions after the break...
This claim of assurances had also been reported in a 2004
60 Minutes II report, sourced to anonymous administration officials:
Before deporting Arar to Syria, American officials involved in the case told 60 Minutes II they had obtained assurances from the Syrian government that Arar would not be tortured, that he would "be treated humanely."
So aparently this was one of those cases where they felt it was "appropriate" to seek assurances.
Hmm, Why would that be?
US State Dept. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - Syria - 2001 (published March 4, 2002):
Continuing serious abuses include the use of torture in detention;...
....
Although torture occurs in prisons, torture is most likely to occur while detainees are being held at one of the many detention centers run by the various security services throughout the country, and particularly while the authorities are attempting to extract a confession or information regarding an alleged crime or alleged accomplices.
From Arar's complaint against John Ashcroft etc. in US court:
[From about October 9, 2002], until about August 19, 2003, Mr. Arar was detained in the Palestine Branch of Syrian Military Intelligence.
Let's turn now to another question...
Please see the Arar Commision report, VOLUME I, p. 204:
The Commissioner of the INS [Bush appointee James Ziglar] had determined that Mr. Arar's removal to Syria would be consistent with Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The decision was signed by [Clinton appointee] J. Scott Blackman, Regional Director, Eastern Region, INS (the Regional Director).
"Consistent with Article 3" ?
UN Convention Against Torture:
Article 3
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.
Back to the 60 Minute II report:
60 Minutes II learned that the decision to deport Arar was made at the highest levels of the U.S. Justice Department, with a special removal order signed by John Ashcroft's former deputy, [SCOTUS short lister] Larry Thompson.
At the time, Ashcroft said the United States deported Arar to protect Americans -- and had every right to do so:
"In removing Mr. Arar from the U.S., we acted fully within the law and applicable international treaties and conventions that guide the activities of the United States in settings like that."
Finally, here are some questions that come immediately to mind and, one would assume, to the mind of any beltway reporter. These are based on information highlighted in the diary, but also on further info from the Arar Commission's report:
1. Which administration lawyers advised the INS that sending Arar to Syria was consistant with Artlce 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture?
2. Does the administration still stand by that assessment?
3. What exactly was the role of John Ashcroft, Larry Thompson, Dick Chenney, and George W. Bush in the decision to deport Arar?
4. Why did US officials originally claim the decision to deport Arar was made bilaterally with Canada?
5. Why wasn't Arar deported to Canada, where he is a citizen?
6. Why was Canada not informed about Arar's deportation and then denied information when they inquired after him?
7. Did administration officials request that Arar be held by the Syrian security services? Did they request that he not by held by them?
8. Does the US contest the Canadian findings that Arar is entirely innocent of any terrorist activity?
9. Does the US contest the Canadian findings that Arar was tortured in Syria, which Syrian officials deny?
10. What action has been taken to prevent other detainees being sent to Syria?
(the content of this diary was originally posted as comments on diaries by ysbee and wamland)
~END~