• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Afghan Detainee Mega Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter rceme_rat
  • Start date Start date
Maybe he can take Steven Staples as a travelling companion ::).  Perhaps we could have a fundraising drive to buy Jack Layton a ticket over as well. ^-^
 
Note to Dr Attaran;

You are now at 14.5 minutes of fame. Make the next 30 seconds count.

This is one of the guys who calls for an inquiry, based on virtually no evidence (remember; no names, no solid dates, no independent witnesses ...) gets a virtual passel of inquiries and now bee-atches at the progress?

30 seconds left buds, make it count....
 
I love this, they claim we are dragging our heals... That we do not want anything to come of this. If that was the case, why don;t we just say "F**k off!" to the guy, and further, why are we continuing to spend millions of dollars on the investigation? Travelling the country, and indeed, three different countries now, is not cheap.

Investigations, especially ones that could potentially destroy people, must never be rushed... This article tells me that the one on going is being very detailed. Of course, personally, I do not for a second beleive that accusations against us, the soldiers are founded for a second...
 
UFC's Tito Ortiz and the USO have already had an Op CS and CS II.  http://www.ocstour.com/  Interesting name choice.
 
....... "rags the puck?"...
Though I understand what he's trying to insinuate... where does he get these expressions?
Certainly not from this web site.
 
milnewstbay said:
An Afghan intermediary sent by investigators to try to make contact with the alleged victims was killed by the Taliban.

Ah yes, a wonderful way of winning the hearts and minds of the people.......
 
Let me see has the Taliban filed a formal complaint about the treatment of it's members to the Red Cresent or similar body?

The people challenging the government as stalling, should fly to Pakistan to interview these people themselves.
 
According to the Military Police Complaints Commission, we're now also seeing it doesn't appear to be DND holding things up, either (highlights mine) - shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

Top officials stall probe into detainees, group charges
Norma Greenaway, The Ottawa Citizen, 22 Feb 08
Article link

The independent Military Police Complaints Commission accused key government authorities yesterday of impeding its public interest investigation into whether Canadians who have transferred detainees to Afghan authorities "aware or wilfully blind" to the prospect that such detainees could be subject to abuse.

The commission said its year-old investigation is at risk of failing for lack of information and it points the finger at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) and Correctional Service Canada (CSC), both of which have been "significantly" engaged in the detainee issue.

The commission said requests for help from the ministers responsible have gone unanswered, and that it has not ruled out resorting to public hearings, thereby gaining the power of subpoena.

"Ultimately, the success of this public interest investigation process is dependent on the voluntary co-operation of government authorities," said the letter, written by commission lawyer Julianne Dunbar.

"If the co-operation sought from such (organizations) as DFAIT and CSC is not forthcoming, the commission is very concerned that this will frustrate the completion of the investigation and that the commission will, therefore, not be able to issue a report which fully addresses the serious allegations raised in this complaint."

The commission gave the Department of Defence better grades, crediting it with establishing the Detainee Information Support Team, with a mandate to respond to the commission's requests for information and documents.

The commission launched its inquiry after receiving a complaint last February from Amnesty International Canada and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association that on at least 18 occasions, Canadian military police had transferred detainees to Afghan authorities "notwithstanding alleged evidence that there was a likelihood they would be tortured."

Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty International Canada, said the commission's blunt letter tells a sad story of unnecessary government secrecy.

"It's really disheartening and distressing to see the extent to which they've faced obstruction and stonewalling in their effort to move forward with the complaint," he said yesterday.

 
Short US think tank report (2 pages, .pdf), but lays out interesting options for detainees....

.....What should ISAF do in the short term? The good news is that two ongoing reviews of strategy in Afghanistan—one by NATO and the other by the U.S. Department of Defense—give ISAF states the political impetus to rationalize their detention policies. Only a few real options exist:

First, ISAF could build and run its own detention facility, as the international force in Kosovo did. This would buy time to help the Afghans improve their detention operations. It also would let ISAF transfer detainees among its contingents more easily and gather better intelligence from detainees. An ISAF-wide facility would be preferable to separate facilities run by each ISAF partner, as it would permit burden sharing and would be easier to explain to the partners’ publics.  This is the best solution, but it will be a hard sell, particularly in Europe. To work, ISAF would need to establish uniform, robust standards for detainee treatment.

If ISAF lacks the will or money to build a new facility, another option exists: the use of U.S. facilities. With common standards of treatment and guaranteed access to their detainees, U.S. allies in Afghanistan might overcome their concerns about transferring detainees to U.S. facilities.  Even this solution faces a hiccup.

Some ISAF partners worry that they lack a legal basis for conducting longer-term detentions in Afghanistan, which suggests another approach: NATO states could seek a new UN Security Council
resolution explicitly authorizing security detentions in Afghanistan. The resolution could establish the basis on which ISAF could detain people—as was done for the Multi-National Forces in Iraq—and incorporate detailed treatment standards for ISAF internment facilities ....
 
Inquiry launched over Afghan detainees issue
Updated Wed. Mar. 12 2008 10:54 AM ET
CTV.ca News Staff

Canada's Military Police Complaints Commission is to hold public-interest hearings into the handling of Afghan detainees by Canadian military police.

The move announced Wednesday comes more than a year after the commission first started to investigate the matter.

"The principal difficulty which has given rise to this decision has been the government's refusal to provide the commission with full access to relevant documents and information under the control of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) and the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)," commission chair Peter A. Tinsley said in a news release.

"Ordering a public interest hearing is necessary to ensure a full investigation of the grave allegations raised in this complaint."

The commission began its investigation on Feb. 26, 2007 following a complaint by Amnesty International Canada and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

Those groups allege that military police allowed detainees to be transferred to Afghan authorities even though they knew of evidence the detainees could be tortured.

But in investigating that claim, "there's been roadblocks put up all along the way," Robert Fife, CTV's Ottawa bureau chief, told Canada AM on Wednesday.

Tinsley said the decision could cost up to $2 million and add months to the investigation.

"However, we are simply left with no other choice. Given the relevance of the information under the control of DFAIT and CSC, the Commission must now seek to compel those documents which the government has failed to provide voluntarily," he said.

The hearings will have the power of subpoena -- and the commission promised it will be used. The hearings will begin in about one month.

"It will be aired in public, so we should be able to get to the bottom of whether ... we knew they were going to be tortured," Fife said.

This announcement precedes Thursday's vote on whether to extend the current Afghan mission until July 2011.

The extension is contingent on NATO providing at least 1,000 more troops and some additional equipment to help Canadian troops.

Fife said Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants the resolution passed before he goes to a NATO meeting in Bucharest, Romania on April 2.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080312/afghan_detainees_080312/20080312?hub=TopStories
 
And more on the Detainee issue.  This is could/should impact upon the MPCC Public Interest Hearings.  Appeal to be filed by the usual suspects in 3...2....1....  Shared in accordance with the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Judge dismisses Charter appeal in Afghan detainee transfers

Commission 'left with no other choice,' chair says
Last Updated: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 | 1:10 PM ET Comments0Recommend0CBC News
A federal judge has ruled the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply to Afghan prisoners captured by Canadian troops.

The court's decision came just hours after Canada's civilian-run military police watchdog announced it will hold public hearings into the military's detainee transfer policy in Afghanistan, in response to "delays and difficulties" in obtaining relevant documents and information from government authorities.

...
 
FYI

The Federal Court of Canada ruled today that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does NOT apply to Afghan detainees.  The link of the attached article is here:  http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080312/afghan_detainees_080312/20080312?hub=TopStories

Charter does not apply to Afghan detainees: ruling

Updated Wed. Mar. 12 2008 3:36 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Canada's Federal Court has rejected Amnesty International's bid to have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply to Afghan detainees captured by Canadian soldiers.

Justice Anne McTavish ruled that Afghan detainees do have rights under the Afghan constitution and international law, but they do not have rights under the Canadian Charter.

"(The court has) accepted the government's arguments. We are obviously very pleased about that," said Prime Minister Stephen Harper in question period.

Amnesty International had hoped to stop Canada from transferring prisoners to Afghan authorities. The move followed reports that some detainees were being tortured by the Afghans.

"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person under the Charter and international law. Individuals detained by Canadian Forces must not face the threat of torture after being transferred," Alex Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada, said in a press release last year.

While calling today's ruling a "big loss" for Amnesty International, CTV Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife noted that the human rights group did win on another matter today. "The (Military Police Complaints Commission) is going to hold public hearings on the way Afghan detainees have been transferred by military police," reported Fife.

Public hearings

The move announced Wednesday comes more than a year after the commission first started to investigate the matter.

"The principal difficulty which has given rise to this decision has been the government's refusal to provide the commission with full access to relevant documents and information under the control of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) and the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)," commission chair Peter A. Tinsley said in a news release.

"Ordering a public interest hearing is necessary to ensure a full investigation of the grave allegations raised in this complaint."

In question period, the prime minister said his government has been cooperative.

"There is no refusal to cooperate. In fact, the Justice Department has made very clear that it will provide all information that it can provide under the law," said Harper.

The commission began its investigation on Feb. 26, 2007 following a complaint by Amnesty International Canada and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

Those groups allege that military police allowed detainees to be transferred to Afghan authorities even though they knew of evidence the detainees could be tortured.

But in investigating that claim, "there's been roadblocks put up all along the way," Robert Fife, CTV's Ottawa bureau chief, told Canada AM on Wednesday.

Jason Gratl, a spokesperson for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, said he believes the Tories will not be forthcoming with relevant information.

"The government is going to squirm and squirrel and use every means at its disposal, hoping to avoid disclosure," Gratl told The Canadian Press.

"We're expecting Mr. Tinsley to be up to the task of holding the government to account."

Tinsley said the probe could cost up to $2 million and add months to the investigation.

"However, we are simply left with no other choice. Given the relevance of the information under the control of DFAIT and CSC, the Commission must now seek to compel those documents which the government has failed to provide voluntarily," he said.

The hearings will have the power of subpoena -- and the commission promised it will be used. The hearings will begin in about one month.

"It will be aired in public, so we should be able to get to the bottom of whether ... we knew they were going to be tortured," Fife said.

Late last year, Canadian officials appear to have come across at least one case where an Afghan detainee was tortured. Canada stopped transferring prisoners to Afghan authorities after the revelations, but has recently resumed the practice.

The announcement of a complaints commission probe precedes Thursday's vote on whether to extend the current Afghan mission until July 2011.

The extension is contingent on NATO providing at least 1,000 more troops and some additional equipment to help Canadian troops.

Fife said Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants the resolution passed before he goes to a NATO meeting in Bucharest, Romania on April 2.


The actual ruling can be read here T-324-07 IN THE MATTER OF AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL CANADA et al. v. CHIEF OF THE DEFENCE STAFF FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES et al. :  http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/rss/T-324-07%20Decision.pdf

For the record IRON RICK: 1  Amnesty International: 0
 
Amnesty international sued the CDS.  Note the name of the case: IN THE MATTER OF AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL CANADA et al. v. CHIEF OF THE DEFENCE STAFF FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES et al.
 
Surprise, Surprise, The Taliban Are Not Canadians
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Article Link

Federal Court Judge Anne Mactavish has ruled that Afghan prisoners captured by Canadian troops are not protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In fact, as it would logically follow, they are afforded rights under the Afghan constitution and are protected under international humanitarian law. Amnesty International had been seeking an injunction of transfers by arguing the Canadian Charter applies to Taliban prisoners under control of Canadian troops. Judge Mactavish argued that just because they are not protected under Canadian law, this does not mean that Canadian troops can act with "impunity".

Canada's independent Military Police Complaints Commission, however, has complained that the federal government has refused to provide unfettered access to uncensored documents. Stephen Harper has rejected the claim. The MPCC wants a public hearing and the authority to issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents from Foreign Affairs about the alleged torture allegations.

Of interest, Victor Wong points out the precedents which led to Judge Mactavish's ruling:

Were Charter standards to be applied in another state’s territory without its consent, there would by that very fact always be interference with the other state’s sovereignty. . . . As a consequence, the majority of the Supreme Court was of the view that Canadian law, including the Charter, could only be enforced in another state with the consent of the other state.

Obviously, Afghanistan would not consent to allowing Canadian Charter rights to be applied to Afghan prisoners in Afghanistan. In light of this ruling, the only things which remains to be proved is that Canada has taken steps adequate to ensure the removal of torture concerns from detention facilities in Kandahar province.
More on link

 
Hmmm... federal judge has ruled.....

Which means that the detractors will take it to the next court.
It aint over till the fat lady sings - or the Supreme court rules.....
 
Unless there is a "REALLY Supreme Court", this is it for the Birkenstock Brigade on this one.
 
MY question is:

Where was Amnesty International, Bono et al when Afghanistan was run by the Taliban?

Ohhh...sorry...the "rights" of terrorists are far more important.....yes I know I'm being sarcsatic, but I find it incredulous that an organization that is supposed to stand for human  rights WON"T STAND UP TO TIN POT DICTATORS. It seems that Amnesty International et al only get involvled if the US or Canada has been alleged to violate human rights.
Case in point....the lady jailed in Mexico...where are they?
 
OldSolduer said:
MY question is:

Where was Amnesty International, Bono et al when Afghanistan was run by the Taliban?

Ohhh...sorry...the "rights" of terrorists are far more important.....yes I know I'm being sarcsatic, but I find it incredulous that an organization that is supposed to stand for human  rights WON"T STAND UP TO TIN POT DICTATORS. It seems that Amnesty International et al only get involvled if the US or Canada has been alleged to violate human rights.
Case in point....the lady jailed in Mexico...where are they?

Not to mention, which government drew up the detainee agreement and why did the "do-gooders" not challenge it back then? I ask this question of all of the AI types whoring for money on Burrard st. I tell them no because they are meddling in the internal politics of a democracy.
 
OldSolduer said:
MY question is:

Where was Amnesty International, Bono et al when Afghanistan was run by the Taliban?

Ohhh...sorry...the "rights" of terrorists are far more important.....yes I know I'm being sarcsatic, but I find it incredulous that an organization that is supposed to stand for human  rights WON"T STAND UP TO TIN POT DICTATORS. It seems that Amnesty International et al only get involvled if the US or Canada has been alleged to violate human rights.
Case in point....the lady jailed in Mexico...where are they?
There are more canadians in Mexican jails.  There are two reservists who are there now.  One was on HLTA from KAF & his Class A buddy who joined him for the vacation break.... If things go well, they should be released by July.... if things go badly, they'll be there for quite a while yet.
 
Back
Top