A new lawsuit has been filed detailing the inhumane practices of force feeding that the US is using at Guantanamo. In 2008, we were told that Obama would close Guantanamo. But now, six years later, it is still open and people are still being treated like cattle. Imad Abdullah Hassan, the man behind the suit, was cleared for release in 2009, yet the US refuses to release him. The group Reprive is handling the case. Hassan has gone on hunger strike and this is what happened:
Smith said that in a meeting at Guantánamo Bay earlier this month, Hassan recounted how staff strapped him to what he called a “torture chair” and force-fed him through large tubes, shoved into and pulled out of his nostrils before and after each feeding.
Hassan told Smith the chair was often still covered in blood and feces from previous inmates who suffered from hemorrhoids and diarrhea, Smith said.
This brings up another question -- how many of the prisoners there have infectious diseases do the prisoners have at Guantanamo since basic sanitation measures are not being used?
The lawsuit refers to the health problems that Hassan is experiencing.
During the forced feedings, Smith said Hassan told him inmates are given food supplements — some of which have reportedly led to pancreatitis — as well as anti-constipation medicines and over half a gallon of water. Smith said this cocktail is generally administered in 20 to 30 minutes.
Hassan reportedly told prison officials he had sinus problems in his right nostril, but that feeding tubes were forced in through that nostril anyway.
Hassan also told Smith that in response to nausea resulting from the forced feedings, he was forced to take Reglan, a drug Hassan said “made him feel crazy.”
While on the drug, Hassan “would sit on his bed, legs folded, thinking that he was talking to the nurse, but he actually found that he was talking to himself,” Smith said in his declaration being filed to the District Court in Washington, D.C.
In addition, people on hunger strikes are denied the right to participate in communal prayers during Ramadan, which amounts to cruel and unusual punishment and a
violation of International Law. This was a right that was recognized as far back as 1899. The Hague regulations:
Prisoners of war shall enjoy every latitude in the exercise of their religion, including attendance at their own church services, provided only they comply with the regulations for order and police issued by the military authorities.
Later international law upholds this. Geneva 1949:
Article 76, third paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides that protected persons in occupied territory who are accused or convicted of offences “have the right to receive any spiritual assistance which they may require”. Article 86 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The Detaining Power shall place at the disposal of interned persons, of whatever denomination, premises suitable for the holding of their religious services.”
The Additional Protocol (1977) states:
All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their …convictions and religious practices.
The Army Field Manual of 1956 incorporates the 1949 Geneva Conventions on treatment of religious prisoners and other military manuals do as well. For instance, from the US Naval Handbook of 1965:
Respect for the religious preferences of detainees is an essential aspect of detainee operations. Accordingly, the organization and administration of the detention facility must not be such as to hinder unjustifiably the observance of religious rites, and commanders should plan for the accommodation of the religious needs of detainees. Certain limitations may be necessary due to security concerns; however, a good faith balance should be struck between the detainee’s obligation to comply with disciplinary rules and procedures and the detaining power’s obligation to afford detainees the ability to meet their religious obligations and exercise their religious practices.
We were told that this would be the most transparent administration in history, but it is really interesting how people are passing the buck. The White House says that this matter is a matter for the Department of Defense. The DOD says this is a matter for the White House. And nothing ever gets done. And then they wonder why people didn't get out and vote in 2010 and 2012 that voted in 2008. This is not change you can believe in.
It's a lot easier to say that you're going to do something on the outside than it is to actually do something once you're in power. Even if there are numerous unforeseen complications in releasing these prisoners, the least the government can do is treat prisoners humanely, allow full access to religious ceremonies, and find better ways of dealing with hunger strikes than treatment which amounts to torture.