UPN, Alm.del - 2006-07

amnesty internationalUNITED STATES OF AMERICAUS detentions in Afghanistan: aniaide-mémoirefor continued action7 June 2005AI Index: AMR 51/093/2005Amnesty International fears that detainees held in incommunicado detention in the USmilitary’s Forward Operating Bases or in the secret custody of the Central IntelligenceAgency (CIA) in Afghanistan remain at particular risk of torture or other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment. It is not known how many detainees are in these bases. What is known isthat hundreds of detainees remain in US custody, but outside any legal framework, in the twomain airbases in Afghanistan – Bagram and Kandahar.Although the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has access to mostdetainees held by US forces in Bagram and Kandahar, it does not have access to those held atthe Forward Operating Bases or by the CIA. At least three detainees have died in ForwardOperating Bases since 2003. Recent allegations raise concerns that torture and ill-treatmentmay be continuing in such bases, where detainees have been held for weeks or months beforebeing released or transferred to Bagram or Kandahar. Concern remains that the CIA may stillbe holding people in secret detention in Afghanistan in situations which would amount to“disappearance”. At least one person is reported to have died in a CIA facility since 2002.The US government maintains that conditions for detainees held in the airbases inBagram and Kandahar, the two main US detention facilities in Afghanistan, are beingimproved. This follows more than two years of persistent allegations of the torture or ill-treatment of detainees held there, including in relation to the deaths in custody of two Afghanmen in Bagram in December 2002, evidently as a result of torture and ill-treatment. Neitherman had been seen by the ICRC before he died (the ICRC does not have a permanentpresence either at Bagram or Kandahar, and so detainees are held entirely incommunicado inbetween visits as well as immediately after arrest). There is evidence that there was an initialattempt by medical personnel to cover up the abuses that led to the deaths, and by militaryspokespeople to suggest that the men had died of natural causes, despite the obvious physicalindications that they had been subjected to brutal and prolonged physical assaults.Hundreds of detainees remain held in Bagram and Kandahar outside any legalframework. Some have been detained without charge or trial for more than a year. They haveno access to lawyers or relatives. Although the ICRC does have access now (although, asnoted, not full), other independent human rights monitors, including from the United Nationsand Amnesty International have been denied access. The indefinite, virtually incommunicado,and unlawful detention of these people may in itself amount to cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment and leaves them at risk of such treatment during any interrogations.Amnesty International is concerned that the conditions for abuse were set by the USadministration’s rejection of Geneva Convention protections for those captured in

Beyond the law: Military and CIA detentions in AfghanistanOn 28 June 2005, it will be exactly one year since the US Supreme Court ruled that the USDistrict Courts have jurisdiction to hear appeals from those held in the US Naval Base inGuantánamo Bay in Cuba. While none of the Guantánamo detainees has yet had thelawfulness of his detention judicially reviewed because of government intransigence, asAmnesty International has reported, at least some of the detainees there have now been visitedby US lawyers seeking to filehabeas corpusappeals for them. The US administrationresponded to the US Supreme Court decision in an entirely minimalist way that disregardedinternational principles, establishing instead the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT)to determine if the detainee is an “enemy combatant”. The CSRT is an executive body underwhich panels of three military officers, possibly relying on secret and coerced evidence,determine if the label “enemy combatant” should remain attached to the detainee, who has noaccess to legal counsel to assist him.In Afghanistan, detainees held by the US military do not even get this minimalprocess. Indeed, at the time of the Supreme Court ruling, the Pentagon said that it “believesthe decision does not cover detainees held in other parts of the world”. According to thegovernment, once detainees held by the US Department of Defense (DoD) in Afghanistan aredesignated as “enemy combatants”, they have an initial review of that status by an armyCommander or designee within 90 days of being taken into custody. After that, “the detainingcombatant commander, on an annual basis, is required to reassess the status of each detainee.Detainees assessed to be enemy combatants under this process remain under DoD controluntil they no longer present a threat.”The main US military detention facility in Afghanistan is at its airbase in Bagram.The ICRC has access to most detainees held at the base, but not immediately after arrest whenthe risk of torture or ill-treatment is at its peak. According to the ICRC, there were about 450detainees held at Bagram at the end of April 2005. Some have been held for more than a year.The ICRC has said that it is “increasingly concerned by the fact that the US authorities havenot resolved the questions of their legal status and of the applicable legal framework”.The second main detention facility is at the US airbase in Kandahar. The ICRC hadaccess to detainees held at the base between December 2001 and June 2002. The organizationregained access to the facility in June 2004 after learning that detentions had resumed there. Itis not known how many detainees were held there between June 2002 and June 2004. At theend of April 2005, the ICRC reported that it is visiting about 70 detainees there.1In its Second Periodic Report to the United Nations Committee Against Torture, theexpert body established by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatment or Punishment to oversee implementation of that treaty, the USgovernment stated that it is “in a process of improving the detention facilities at both Bagramand Kandahar”. It added that the “improved facilities should be available to detainees later in2005”. On 30 April 2005, one week before the US issued its report to the Committee AgainstTorture, the ICRC said that its “observations regarding certain aspects of the conditions ofA month earlier, the ICRC had reported that the number of detainees in Kandahar was about 250.Amnesty International understands that a substantial number were transferred to Bagram, wherepreviously there were only about 300 detainees. There have also been some releases.1

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actiondetention and treatment of detainees in Bagram and Guantanamo have not yet beenadequately addressed.” It had earlier characterized these as “significant problems”.The ICRC does not have a permanent presence at Bagram or Kandahar. Detainees arethus held entirely incommunicado between ICRC visits. If ICRC delegates visit a detentionfacility, for example, every two weeks, and even if they were to meet all detainees, a detaineecould be held for at least up to this length of time and released without having had any contactwith the outside world.The ICRC does not have access to the US military’s network of Forward OperatingBases in Afghanistan. From time to time, detainees are held in these facilities as the militaryconducts operations in the area. The military has operated more than 20 such facilities. Somedetainees have been held for as long as one or two months in such bases, entirelyincommunicado, before their release or transfer to Bagram or Kandahar. At least threedetainees died in US custody in Forward Operating Bases in 2003.In addition, the CIA is believed to have engaged in secret detentions in Afghanistan.In March 2005, Vice Admiral Albert Church noted, when issuing the executive summary ofhis review into Department of Defense interrogation operations, that “the CIA hasindependent operations in Afghanistan”. It was earlier reported that the CIA operated a secretfacility at the Bagram airbase. It is not known what presence, if any, the CIA currently has atBagram or Kandahar. The military reviews that have been conducted into US interrogationand detention practices have not covered, or had the full cooperation of, the CIA.One reported CIA detention facility was known as The Pit or The Salt Pit, anabandoned brick factory north of Kabul. In November 2002, an Afghan detainee wasallegedly stripped, chained to the floor, assaulted, and left in a cell overnight without blankets,on the orders of a CIA agent. He died, with hypothermia being given as the cause of death.According to reports, he was buried by Afghan guards in an unmarked grave, his family nevernotified. TheWashington Postquoted one US government official as stating that “he justdisappeared off the face of the earth”. The Salt Pit facility has since reportedly been torndown.The international armed conflict in Afghanistan ended in June 2002. When that armedconflict ended, those who were captured by the USA during hostilities - and who the USAwas obliged under the Third Geneva Convention to treat as prisoners of war in the absence ofa determination “by a competent tribunal” that they were not - were required to be released,unless charged with criminal offences. Civilians detained in that conflict were entitled to havetheir detention (“internment”) reviewed “as soon as possible” by a “court or administrativeboard.” They too were required, when that conflict ended, to be released, unless charged withrecognized criminal offences.The ICRC has stated that “Persons detained in relation to a non-international armedconflict waged as part of the fight against terrorism – as is the case with Afghanistan sinceJune 2002 – are protected by Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and the relevantrules of customary international humanitarian law. The rules of international human rightsand domestic law also apply to them. If tried for any crimes they may have committed theyare entitled to the fair trial guarantees of international humanitarian and human rights law.”2Amnesty International, too, believes that international human rights law applies in the currentsituation and all detainees have the right to full judicial review of their detention, and torelease if that detention is unlawful. Anyone else should be charged under national law withrecognizably criminal offences and brought to trial in full accordance with fair trial standards.International humanitarian law and terrorism: questions and answers.International Committee of theRed Cross, 5 May 2004,http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/5YNLEV.2

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionThose detained in countries outside of the zones of armed conflict and transferred toAfghanistan should always have been treated as criminal suspects, therefore subject tointernational human rights law, including the right to a prompt judicial review of thelawfulness of their detention and to release if that detention is deemed unlawful, and, ifprosecuted, to be tried in proceedings which meet international standards of fairness. In the“war on terror”, the USA has transferred to detention in Afghanistan people detained in othercountries including Pakistan, Gambia, Zambia, Macedonia and Thailand. As far as AmnestyInternational is aware it may still be holding such detainees without charge or trial inAfghanistan (as well as having transferred some to Guantánamo).The USA has applied none of the above-mentioned provisions of internationalhumanitarian law and international human rights law in determining the status of theAfghanistan detainees:it has not treated those captured during the international armed conflict inAfghanistan initially as prisoners of war, pending determination of their status by acourt;it has not convened a court to determine whether or not persons captured during theinternational armed conflict in Afghanistan are entitled to prisoner of war status;it has not reviewed promptly and appropriately the detention of those captured duringthe subsequent non-international armed conflict in Afghanistan;it has not brought the detention of civilians promptly under judicial review, tried orreleased them;it did not, at the close of international hostilites, release the detainees captured duringhostilities, with the exception of those against whom criminal procedures had beeninitiated – in fact, the USA initiated no such procedures.In early 2002, the White House had announced that anyone detained in the context ofthe armed conflict in Afghanistan would not be granted prisoner of war status nor broughtbefore a competent tribunal to determine their status as Article 5 of the Third GenevaConventions required. A soldier interviewed as part of the military investigation into thedeaths of the two detainees in Bagram air base in December 2002 told investigators that thedecision to withhold Geneva Convention protections from detainees captured in Afghanistanled interrogators to believe that they “could deviate slightly from the rules. There was theGeneva Conventions for enemy prisoners of war, but nothing for terrorists”.3

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionAnother Afghan man, Jannat Gul, said that he had been held for 16 months in Bagramair base before being released in March 2005. He said that he had initially been held in the USmilitary facility in Gardez where, he alleges:“Theyput me in a kneeling position like this. They told me not to sit back on my heels.They said ‘look straight ahead, don’t look to the sides’. There were four or five guyssurrounding me and insulting me and beating me. For three days, I was not allowedto sleep. Then, on the fourth, they made me kneel all night.”He continued:“They punched me, they kicked me, once to my chin. Another time I was told to liedown and they picked me up by my neck so I was half-strangled and they said ‘we aregoing to kill you unless you confess what you did’.”An 18-year-old Afghan army recruit died in the US military base in Gardez in March2003. Local Afghan officials were allegedly pressured to cover up the death, which onlycome to light as a result of a non-governmental investigation, the Crimes of War Project.Jamal Naseer’s body, said to be covered in bruises, was allegedly turned over to local policewith no documentation of his death and no autopsy conducted. A US investigation was notinitiated until 18 months later. Jamal Naseer had reportedly been arrested with seven otherAfghan soldiers on 1 March 2003 by US Special Forces. One of the seven later said that heand his fellow detainees were treated “like animals” when taken to the Gardez base. Thedetainees have alleged that for 17 days in the base, they were subjected to torture and ill-treatment, including repeated beatings, electric shocks and immersion in cold water. Theywere hooded and shackled during interrogations.For the BBC Radio report of 2 June 2005, the journalist spoke to an Afghaninterpreter. He has alleged that he witnessed the abuse of a Pakistani detainee held in USmilitary custody at a forward operating base in Khost. He said that the detainee was refusingto “cooperate” during interrogation, and so the US interrogators put two large loudspeakers inhis cell. The interpreter alleged that the interrogators played “American” music at highvolume. The interpreter continued: “If somebody stay there for 10 minutes, he’s going to bedeaf. This tape was running for 11 hours”. The journalist has confirmed to AmnestyInternational that when she saw the interpreter, he was still noticeably distressed by havingwitnessed detainees being taunted sexually by female US interrogators, or being told that theirwives would be forced into prostitution while they, the men, were in detention. An interpreterwho refused to tell the detainees this was reportedly sacked.The interpreter has also alleged that he witnessed the use of water deprivation aspunishment against a young male detainee held in the US Forward Operating Base inAsadabad. The detainee allegedly died, still handcuffed, after three or four days withoutadequate water. Amnesty International has been unable to obtain further information at thisstage on this alleged death in custody.A 28-year-old Afghan man, Abdul Wali, died in the Asadabad base on 21 June 2003.Abdul Wali had handed himself into the US military voluntarily. In June 2004, the US JusticeDepartment charged a civilian contractor with assault. The indictment alleges that DavidPassaro, a contractor working with the CIA, assisted in the interrogation. According to theindictment, David Passaro “beat Abdul Wali, using his hands and feet, and a large flashlight”,during interrogations on 19 and 20 June 2003. It seems that no murder charges were broughtbecause an autopsy was not conducted.Another Afghan man, Abdul Wahid died in US custody in a cell in a US ForwardOperating Base in Gereshk on 6 November 2003. He died from “multiple blunt force injuries”48 hours after he was handed over to the US forces by Afghan militia. The US military

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actioninvestigation found that no US personnel were implicated in his death, which it said had beencaused by injuries sustained in Afghan militia custody. Amnesty International does not knowwhat, if any, medical treatment Abdul Wahid received in US custody.In May 2005, theNew York Timesrevealed that it had obtained documents relating tothe military investigation into the deaths in Bagram in December 2002 of two Afghan men,Dilawar and Mullah Habibullah. The investigative reports point to a terrifying final few daysin the lives of these two men, subjected to cruelty and brutality by numerous US personnel.For example, Dilawar, a taxi driver apparently picked up for being in the wrong place at thewrong time, was kept chained to the ceiling of his cell for much of a four-day period, hoodedfor most if not all of the time. At times, his pleas for water were denied. Under interrogation,unable to hold his handcuffed hands above his head as he was ordered, a soldier would hitthem back up whenever they began to drop. He was physically assaulted during interrogation.He was estimated in one 24-hour period to have been struck over 100 times with “commonperoneal strikes” – blows to the side of the leg just above the knee. His legs, according to onecoroner, “had basically been pulpified”. The coroner who conducted the autopsy later statedthat she had “seen similar injuries in an individual run over by a bus”.5Torture and ill-treatment of detainees in US custody in Afghanistan is alleged to haveincluded the following methods: sleep deprivation; stripping and forced nudity; humiliatingbody searches; racial and religious insults and taunting; sexual humiliation of male detaineesby female interrogators; prolonged solitary confinement; forced crawling; stress positions,including forced kneeling and standing; arms handcuffed above head to top of cell; deaththreats; threats of torture; threats of rape; light deprivation; use of dogs to inspire fear; beingforced to lie on rocky ground for hours; kicking, punching and other physical assault; hooding,including for days at a time; cruel and excessive use of shackles and handcuffs; forcedshaving, including of all facial and body hair; food deprivation; water deprivation; electricshocks; immersion in water, cigarette burns; and soldiers urinating on detainees.At a press conference on 31 May 2005, responding to a question relating to AmnestyInternational’s concerns about US “war on terror” detentions, President George W. Bush saidthat it seemed to him that the organization was basing such concerns “on the word of – andthe allegations – by people who were held in detention, people who hate America.” In fact,the allegations of torture and ill-treatment have come not only from detainees, but also fromnon-detainee sources, including from within the US government itself. These cannot bedismissed as the product of “anti-Americanism”. For example:A Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document, dated December 2004 andoriginally classified as secret for 25 years revealed that, in relation to US detentionsin Afghanistan, FBI agents were “aware of detainees being subjected to interrogationtechniques that would not be permitted in the United States (i.e. stress positions forextended periods of time and sleep deprivation) and to psychological techniques (i.e.loud music)” (see further below for more on FBI records).Army investigative documents relating to the two deaths in Bagram, obtained by theNew York Times,indicated that abuses in the airbase were widespread: “In swornstatements to Army investigators, soldiers describe one female interrogator with ataste for humiliation stepping on the neck of one prostrate detainee and kickinganother in the genitals. They tell of a shackled prisoner being forced to roll back andforth on the floor of a cell, kissing the boots of his two interrogators as he went. YetIn US report, brutal details of 2 Afghan inmates’ deaths.New York Times, 20 May 2005. Threepassengers who had been in Dilawar’s taxi were subsequently transferred to Guantánamo. One of them,Parkhudin, alleged that his hands were chained to the ceiling for eight of the 10 days he spent inisolation in Bagram.Afghan deaths linked to unit at Iraq prison.New York Times, 23 May 2004.5

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionanother prisoner is made to pick plastic bottle caps out of a drum mixed withexcrement and water as part of a strategy to soften him up for questioning…[T]heBagram files includes ample testimony that harsh treatment by some interrogatorswas routine and that guards could strike shackled detainees with virtual impunity.Prisoners considered important or troublesome were also handcuffed and chained tothe ceilings and doors of their cells, sometimes for long periods.” A US soldierdescribed how in Bagram, “there was a policy that detainees were hooded, shackledand isolated for at least the first 24 hours, sometimes 72 hours of captivity”.6An official military investigation in 2004 (the “Fay report”) found that USinterrogators in Afghanistan were “removing clothing, isolating people for longperiods of time, using stress positions, exploiting fear of dogs and implementing sleepand light deprivation”. It was not critical of the techniquesper se.The Fay reportnoted that “removal of clothing for both [military intelligence] and [military police]objectives was authorized, approved, and employed in Afghanistan and GTMO[Guantánamo].” It stated: The use of nudity as an interrogation technique or incentiveto maintain the cooperation of detainees was not a technique developed at AbuGhraib, but rather a technique which was imported and can be traced throughAfghanistan and GTMO. As interrogation operations in Iraq began to take form, itwas often the same personnel who had operated and deployed in other theaters and insupport of GWOT, who were called upon to establish and conduct interrogationoperations in Abu Ghraib… They simply carried forward the use of nudity into theIraqi theater of operations. The use of clothing as an incentive (nudity) is significantin that it likely contributed to an escalating ‘de-humanization’ of the detainees and setthe stage for additional and more severe abuses to occur.”In 2004, the “Schlesinger Panel”, appointed by Secretary of Defense DonaldRumsfeld to review Department of Defense detention operations, noted that SpecialOperations Forces in Afghanistan had been implicated in “a range of abuses… similarin scope and magnitude to those found among conventional forces”. The Schlesingerinvestigation also revealed that on 24 January 2003, the Commander of Joint TaskForce-180 in Afghanistan forwarded to the Pentagon Working Group a list ofinterrogation techniques being used in Afghanistan. Among the techniques listed wasthe use of nudity against detainees. The Fay report noted that the CJTF-180memorandum “highlighted that deprivation of clothing had not historically beenincluded in battlefield interrogations. However, it went on to recommend clothingremoval as an effective technique that could potentially raise objections as beingdegrading or inhumane, but for which no specific written legal prohibition existed.”On 10 January 2002, an officer with the UK Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) inAfghanistan reported back to London his concern at the treatment of a detainee in UScustody that he had witnessed. What he saw has not been made public, but theresponse from London included the following instructions sent back to the SIS officerthe next day and copied to all UK intelligence personnel in Afghanistan: “Itappearsfrom your description that [the detainees in US custody] are not being treated inaccordance with the appropriate standards. Given that they are not within ourcustody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this. That said[the UK government’s] stated commitment to human rights makes it important thatthe Americans understand that we cannot be party to such ill treatment nor can we beseen to condone it… If circumstances allow, you should consider drawing this to theattention of a suitably senior US official locally. It is important that you do not6

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionengage in any activity yourself that involves inhumane or degrading treatment ofprisoners… [Y]our actions incur criminal liability in the same way as if you werecarrying out those acts in the UK”.In June 2002, the UK authorities raised with their US counterparts allegations ofdetainees in US custody in Afghanistan being hooded and subjected to sleepdeprivation. A month later, a UK intelligence official raised with a US official inAfghanistan the inappropriateness of sleep deprivation, hooding and the use of stresspositions against detainees, which the US official had said was being used to “get adetainee ready” for interrogation. The UK officer also raised with a US official incharge of a detention facility a detainee’s allegations of ill-treatment, including “theuse of constant bright lights”.The US military lawyer for one of the four men charged in Guantánamo inpreparation for their trial by military commission has described as “credible”allegations made by his client that he was subjected to abuse in US custody inAfghanistan. Salim Ahmed Hamdan has told his military lawyer that in US custodyin Afghanistan he was “beaten, that he was held for about three days in a boundposition, cold… dragged, kicked, punched.”The regional director of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission inGardez, Afghanistan, told Amnesty International on 23 March 2005 that his officehas recorded some 80 complaints of abuse by US forces in the single province ofPaktika over the past two years, ranging from destruction and confiscation of propertyto “inhuman” treatment of detainees. He said that detainees taken to US ForwardOperating Bases have alleged that they were subjected to sleep deprivation, fooddeprivation, strip searching and stripping, as well as to interrogations whileblindfolded.Recent [heavily redacted] documents released to the American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU) under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, and published by the ACLU on 25 May2005, including the following reports by FBI agents on allegations made to them by detaineesheld at Guantánamo:oo“prior to an interview in Bagram, he was forced to strip naked in front of others.”“treated harshly by US soldiers at Peshawar and Kandahar. He was beaten on thehead, chest, back, hands and feet. He could hear people screaming and shouting butcould not see them because his face was covered. He was put face down on theground.”“[w]hen REDACTED was turned over to US authorities, he was beaten by the USmilitary forces. REDACTED was turned over to US authorities REDACTED. He wastaken by helicopter to an unknown location where he was beaten. While his eyes werecovered, he was kicked in the stomach and back by several individuals. He notedAmerican English accents. After being moved to an unknown facility in Bagram, hishead was placed against the cement floor and his head was kicked. As a result ofother beatings in Bagram, REDACTED received a broken shoulder. During oneevening REDACTED was left outside of the facility where he was being held. Theground was wet and it was snowing. He was wearing only pants and a ragged shirt.As a result of being out in the cold, he became unconscious. . . . . When he wasmoved to Kandahar, he was not beaten as frequently and severely. Periodically,REDACTED was kicked and pushed. He was dragged three times to interrogations.On one occasion during prayer time, a soldier placed his foot on REDACTED headand sat on his head. REDACTED stated that the soldiers wore tan and browncamouflage uniforms, with US flags on their arms.”

The US government has said that it has “acted swiftly in response to allegations ofserious abuses by [Department of Defense] personnel in Afghanistan.”7In May 2005, itreported to the UN Committee against Torture that there had been 23 investigations intoallegations of abuse of detainees in Afghanistan, of which 22 were substantiated and one wasunsubstantiated. It added that seven investigations were continuing. As of 1 March 2005,there had been two courts-martial, 10 non-judicial punishments and two reprimands.8In its report to the Committee, the US authorities promote the case of the two Bagramdeaths as an example of the system of accountability working, noting that 28 US militarypersonnel were implicated in the deaths. By 6 May 2005, two had been charged. It failed totell the Committee that there was evidence at initial attempts to cover up the abuses, and thatthe revelations about the deaths have only emerged into the public domain as a result ofinvestigative reporting and leaks. It remains to be seen whether the pattern of impunity andmilitary leniency elsewhere in the USA’s “war on terror” is continued in these two deaths-in-custody cases.As Amnesty International has previously pointed out, precisely what is considered byUS forces (and the US administration) to be abusive is open to question. In any event, it doesnot comply with international law and standards, as interrogation techniques and detentionconditions have been authorized that violate the absolute prohibition under international lawof torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Another recently emergedexample of this is contained in the record of an official investigation into the allegedmistreatment of six Afghan nationals in the Forward Operating Base Ripley in Afghanistan inJune 2004. The allegation included that the detainees had been:(a) Forced to repeat stand up and sit down.(b) Move small rocks from one pile to another.(c) Stand with extended arms for long periods.(d) Kneel in place for long periods…The investigation found on 6 July 2004 that the allegations were “unsubstantiated”.This was apparently because the above methods are authorized. The investigation found thattechniques (a) to (d) “take place as control measures for sleep deprivation and as punishment

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionfor breaking camp rules… Investigative efforts supported Marines’ actions as appropriate andwithin [standard operating procedures], guidance and training”.9Responding to a question about Amnesty International’s concerns regarding theUSA’s “war on terror” detentions at the 31 May 2005 White House press conference,President Bush said: “The United States is a country that is – promotes freedom around theworld. When there’s accusations made about certain actions by our people, they’re fullyinvestigated in a transparent way. In terms of the detainees, we’ve had thousands of peopledetained. We’ve investigated every single complaint against the detainees.”Investigations cannot be considered to be “full” if the investigators and theprosecuting authorities tolerate what international law and standards would prohibit as tortureor other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.10

Lack of outside scrutiny: UN expert mandate not renewedAs already noted, the ICRC has had access to some of the detainees in Bagram and Kandaharsome of the time, and to none of the detainees held in Forward Operating Bases or in thecustody of the CIA. The ICRC’s policy is not to publish its findings, but only to makerecommendations in confidence to the detaining authority.Amnesty International and other independent human rights monitors, including fromthe United Nations (UN), have been denied access to detainees held in US custody inAfghanistan throughout the “war on terror”.In his report of March 2005, the UN Independent Expert on the Situation of HumanRights in Afghanistan, M. Cherif Bassiouni, wrote of the reports of abuses by Coalition forcesin Afghanistan that he had received from victims, the Afghan Independent Human RightsCommission and others. The alleged abuses include: “forced entry into homes, arrest anddetention of nationals and foreigners without legal authority or judicial review, sometimes forextended periods of time, forced nudity, hooding and sensory deprivation, sleep and fooddeprivation, forced squatting and standing for long periods of time in stress positions, sexualabuse, beatings, torture and use of force resulting in death”.Professor Bassiouni’s mandate as UN independent expert on Afghanistan was notrenewed at the UN Commission for Human Rights in April 2005. In an interview with theBBC on 25 April 2005, he suggested that one reason for this was because of his “insistence”that he be allowed access to detainees held in US custody in Bagram, Kandahar and theforward operating bases. He reiterated that he had “interviewed a number of persons whohave indicated that they had been arbitrarily arrested, that they had been tortured” by UShttp://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/navy3716.3726.pdfThis is amply illustrated by an FBI email dated 22 May 2004 referring to an instruction to FBIpersonnel in Iraq “not to participate in interrogations by military personnel which might includetechniques authorized by Executive Order but beyond the bounds of standard FBI practice”. The emailsaid that some of FBI personnel, although not themselves participating in abuse, had been “in thegeneral vicinity of interrogations in which such tactics were being used”. The email goes on to seekclarification of an instruction from the Office of General Counsel (OGC) requiring FBI personnel toreport any abuse that he or she comes across: “Thisinstruction begs the question of what constitutes‘abuse’. We assume this does not include lawful interrogation techniques authorized by ExecutiveOrder. We are aware that prior to a revision in policy last week, an Executive Order signed byPresident Bush authorized the following interrogation techniques among others: sleep ‘management’,use of MWDs (military working dogs), ‘stress positions’ such as half squats, ‘environmentalmanipulation’ such as use of loud music, sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc. We assumethe OGC instruction does not include the reporting of these authorized interrogation techniques, andthat the use of these techniques does not constitute ‘abuse’.”109

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionforces in Afghanistan. The reason his mandate had not been renewed, he suggested, was notbecause “anybody felt the job was done”, but because of US government pressure not torenew. The interview continued:Q.Let’s be clear about this, what you are suggesting is that an independent humanrights monitor mandated by the UN in Afghanistan has been prevented from doingthat job because, you say, the Americans didn’t want you, to put it bluntly, pokingyour nose into what they were getting up to in various camps where they wereholding detainees.A.That is correct. In fact what my report does not contain is an exchange ofcorrespondence I’ve had with the US ambassador to Geneva… in which he basicallysays the United Nations mandate does not include going into areas where Americanbases are. He takes the position that the American bases there are above and beyondthe reach of the law.

Call for legality, transparency and accountabilityAmong the numerous official reviews of detentions and interrogations that have beenconducted since the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, one was carried out in Afghanistan.Brigadier General Chuck Jacoby carried out an “inspection” of US detentions in Afghanistanto “ascertain the standard of treatment provided by persons detained by US forces throughoutthe detention process from capture to release or detention”.11The Jacoby report is said by thegovernment to have not “disclose[d] new allegations of abuse or misconduct”.12BrigadierGeneral Jacoby’s “consistent and overarching observation” is said to have been that alldetainees were being treated humanely.13In December 2004, however, the Pentagon had characterized the Jacoby inquiry as “akind of snapshot of training, of conditions inside of prisons. It did not look back to incidentsthat may have occurred inside of Afghanistan.”14As a “snapshot”, it was never likely touncover “new allegations of abuse or misconduct”. In any event, the Jacoby report has notbeen published. Given the gap between what the US authorities consider abusive and what isabusive under international law and standards, the reported conclusions of the Jacoby reportare unsurprising. Indeed, they form part of what appears to have been a general whitewash ofsenior official accountability in relation to the USA’s “war on terror” detention regime.A former UN Special Rapporteur on torture (2002-2004), Professor Theo van Boven,has stated on the question of the USA’s involvement in torture and ill-treatment in the “waron terror” that “what we know is only the tip of an iceberg”. What we do know is that treaties,including the Geneva Conventions, the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the International Covenant on Civil andPolitical Rights (ICCPR), all of which have been ratified by the USA, have been selectivelydisregarded and systematically violated.The USA’s Second Periodic Report to the UN Committee against Torture, submittedon 6 May 2005, insists that the USA “has taken and continues to take all allegations of abusevery seriously”. It states, however, that none of the “extensive investigative reports” intoabuses against detainees in US custody in the “war on terror” have found that “anySecond Periodic Report of the United States of America to the Committee Against Torture.USDepartment of State, 6 May 2005.12Ibid.13Ibid.14Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Lawrence Di Rita. USDepartment of Defense Briefing, 3 December 2004.11

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actiongovernmental policy directed, encouraged or condoned these abuses”. The reports to which itrefers have generally taken a “lessons-learned” approach rather than an approach that alsoclarifies where responsibility for abuse lies and facilitates prosecution or disciplinarysanctions as appropriate, as international standards require. Secrecy remains the order of theday, with much material from the investigations remaining classified.Since May 2004, Amnesty International has been calling for US Congress to set up afull independent commission of inquiry into all aspects of the USA’s “war on terror”detention and interrogation policies and practices. Such a commission, composed of credibleexperts with all the necessary powers to be able to investigate all levels and agencies ofgovernment, must be independent, impartial and non-partisan and should apply all relevantinternational law and standards, and would benefit from expert international input.Amnesty International stresses that, under international law, US legislators have,alongside the executive and the judiciary, an obligation to ensure that all allegations of humanrights violations are fully investigated. The UN Human Rights Committee has made it clearthat, for violations of the ICCPR, which the USA ratified in 1992, failures to abide by therequirements of the treaty “cannot be justified by reference to political, social, cultural oreconomic considerations within the State”. Amnesty International urges Congress not toallow party politics to interfere with their obligation to ensure full accountability for pastviolations and to initiate all necessary legislative and oversight measures to ensure non-repetition. The Human Rights Committee continued that state parties must “make reparationto individuals whose rights have been violated”:“Withoutreparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated, theobligation to provide an effective remedy…is not discharged… [T]he Committeeconsiders that the Covenant generally entails appropriate compensation. TheCommittee notes that, where appropriate, reparation can involve restitution,rehabilitation and measures of satisfaction, such as public apologies, publicmemorials, guarantees of non-repetition and changes in relevant laws and practices,as well as bringing to justice the perpetrators of human rights violations”.All secret and incommunicado US detentions must end. Access for all detainees tolawyers, relatives, the ICRC and national and international human rights monitors should begranted and maintained. All detainees must be treated humanely in the real sense of the term,namely in full accordance with international law and standards. All past violations must befully and independently investigated and revealed, and those responsible for them heldaccountable. Anyone in US custody suspected of a criminal offence should be charged andbrought to trial in full accordance with international standards of fairness. Anyone else shouldbe released. No one should be returned from US custody to a country or situation where he orshe would face execution or torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment, or to unfair trial, or indefinite incommunicado or secret detention without chargeor trial.

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actiontheir legs chained, whereupon soldiers walked across their backs. AmnestyInternational never received a substantive reply to its concerns expressed to the USauthorities about allegations of torture or ill-treatment raised in these or subsequentcases.Abdullah’s arrest along with 33 others took place at 3am in a compound nearKandahar in Afghanistan on 18 March 2002. He told Amnesty International inOctober 2002 after his release that US forces broke down all the doors and tookeverybody outside. The detainees had their hands zip-tied behind their backs andwere taken to Kandahar air base, where they were forced to lie on the gravel forseveral hours, their hands cuffed, now with metal handcuffs, behind their backs.Abdullah said that during this time he was kicked in the ribs and that he and all hisfellow detainees were hooded and searched by dogs. They were subjected to forcedshaving. He said that he was shaved of his entire facial and body hair by a woman. Hewas then put in a cage, under a tent, with about 14 others, including a boy of about 15.Some in the cage refused to eat because they did not want to have to use the toilet, aportable pot in the corner. Abdullah said that during interrogation, he was handcuffed,shackled and hooded, and that a female interrogator pulled and pushed him. He saidthat the cultural violations were the most traumatizing aspects of the treatment.In May 2003 in Kabul, former detainee Sayed Abbasin recalled to AmnestyInternational how in the US air base at Bagram he had been held in handcuffs andshackles for the first week, kept under 24-hour lighting and woken by guards whentrying to sleep, not given enough food, not allowed to talk to or look at otherdetainees, and forced to stand and kneel for hours. During this time he wasinterrogated six or seven times. He recalled his transfer to Kandahar air base –blindfolded, a black bag over his head and taped around his neck, his hands and legstied. He said the handling was so rough, he would not have been surprised if someonewould have died. In Kandahar, again the detainees were not allowed to look at thesoldiers’ faces. If they did, they were made to kneel for an hour. If they looked twice,they were made to kneel for two hours. He says he was interrogated five or six timesin Kandahar, before being transferred to Guantánamo Bay.In a letter sent from Guantánamo, dated 12 July 2004 and copied to AmnestyInternational, Moazzam Begg alleges that in Afghanistan he was “physically abused,and degradingly stripped by force, then paraded in front of several cameras toted byUS personnel”. Moazzam Begg, a dual UK/Pakistan national, was abducted inJanuary 2002 from Pakistan by US agents and taken to the US air force base inBagram in Afghanistan where he claims to have been subjected to “pernicious threatsof torture, actual vindictive torture and death threats – amongst other coercivelyemployed interrogation techniques”. He has alleged that he was interrogated “in anenvironment of generated fear, resonant with terrifying screams of fellow detaineesfacing similar methods. In this atmosphere of severe antipathy towards detainees wasthe compounded use of racially and religiously prejudicial taunts.” He wrote that hewas denied natural light and fresh food for a year in Bagram before being transferredto Guantánamo where he was subsequently held in indefinite solitary confinement.Afghan national Wazir Mohammed told Amnesty International in Kabul in February2004 that during his nearly two months in US custody in Bagram and Kandahar airbases in mid-2002, he never saw anyone from the ICRC. He has alleged that he wassubjected to sleep deprivation as well as being forced to crawl on his knees from hiscell to his interrogation.

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionOn 13 April 2004 in Yemen, Walid Muhammad Shahir Muhammad al-Qadasi spokewith Amnesty International in a cell in the Political Security Prison in Sana’a. He hadrecently been returned from detention in Guantánamo Bay. He recalled how he hadbeen arrested in Iran in late 2001 and detained there for about three months beforebeing handed over with other detained foreign nationals to the authorities inAfghanistan who in turn handed them over to the custody of the US. There they werekept in a prison in Kabul. “TheAmericans interrogated us on our first night which wecoined as ‘the black night’. They cut our clothes with scissors, left us naked and tookphotos of us before they gave us Afghan clothes to wear. They then handcuffed ourhands behind our backs, blindfolded us and started interrogating us. The interrogatorwas an Egyptian. He asked me about the names of all members of my family, relativesand friends. They threatened me with death, accusing me of belonging to al-Qa’ida.They put us in an underground cell measuring approximately two metres by threemetres. There were ten of us in the cell. We spent three months in the cell. There wasno room for us to sleep so we had to alternate. The window of the cell was very small.It was too hot in the cell, despite the fact that outside the temperature was freezing(there was snow), because the cell was overcrowded. They used to open the cell fromtime to time to allow air in. During the three-month period in the cell we were notallowed outside into the open air. We were allowed access to toilets twice a day; thetoilets were located by the cell.”Walid al-Qadasi said that the prisoners were only fedonce a day and that loud music was used as “torture”. He said that one of his fellowdetainees went insane. Walid al-Qadasi was eventually transferred to Bagram, wherehe faced a month of interrogation.In June 2004, Khaled El-Masri, a German national, told Amnesty International that hehad been secretly held in Kabul, Afghanistan, after being abducted and taken thereaboard a plane from Macedonia in early 2004. It has since been reported by NBCNews that Khaled El Masri was kept in secret detention in the “Salt Pit” in Kabul,even after the CIA realized it had the wrong man in a case of mistaken identity. Inmid-2004, Khaled El Masri told Amnesty International that he was detained in Kabulin early 2004. He alleged that other detainees told him of a nearby detention facilityin which there were around 200 detainees, most of whom “belonged” to the Afghanauthorities, but about 10 of whom “belonged” to the US and would be movedwhenever the ICRC visited.Mohammed Ismail Agha was aged 13 when he was taken into US custody inAfghanistan in late 2002 and held in Bagram air base for six weeks. He wasnevertheless considered to be a “threat to US security” and was subsequently held inUS custody without charge or trial for more than a year, including at GuantánamoBay. He has alleged that he was held in solitary confinement in Bagram and subjectedto sleep deprivation and stress positions: “They were interrogating me every day andin the first three or four days giving just a little food, and giving punishment”. He saidhe was forced to sit on his haunches for three or four hours at a time, even when hewanted to sleep. He said: “Itwas a very bad place. Whenever I started to fall asleep,they would kick on my door and yell at me to wake up. When they were trying to getme to confess, they made me stand partway, with my knees bent, for one or two hours.Sometimes I couldn’t bear it anymore and I fell down, but they made me stand thatway some more.”At the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) hearing for Yemeni detaineeKhaled Qasim in September 2004, the following exchange took place between theTribunal President (TP) and the “Personal Representative” (PR) of the detainee(Khaled Qasim did not attend the hearing himself):

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionPR: [Khaled Qasim]said he was not tortured. All he said is that he heard peoplecrying at night, but he was not tortured.TP:While here in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba?PR:He said he was not tortured here in Guantanamo Bay.TP:Did he say he was not tortured in Afghanistan or did he say he was not torturedhere in Guantanamo Bay?PR:He said he was not tortured here in Guantanamo Bay.TP:Did he say he was tortured in Afghanistan?PR:He said he was treated bad and mistreated.TP:But he did not say he was tortured?PR:He did not say he was tortured.Bisher al-Rawi, an Iraqi national and UK resident seized in Gambia in late 2002 andtransferred to Guantánamo via Afghanistan, told his CSRT hearing in September2004 that “we were taken from Gambia to Kabul and then to Bagram Airbase. InBagram, I provided information only after I was subjected to sleep deprivation, andvarious threats were made against me.” Moazzam Begg has revealed that he sawBisher al-Rawi in Bagram in late 2002 and that “his face had obviously the marks andbruises of what were the remnants of a beating”.A Saudi detainee in Guantánamo has told investigators that when he was held inBagram, a US soldier pulled out his penis during an interrogation, held it against thedetainee’s face, and threatened to rape him.15Richard Belmar, another UK national, has said that he sustained a fractured skull as aresult of being struck on the head while hooded on his way to Bagram airbase. He hasfurther claimed that this was not the worst thing that happened to him in US custody:“The worst thing that happened to me, I can’t even explain because it’s too horrific, Ican’t, you know, I can’t handle it, to speak on it”. At his CSRT hearing inGuantánamo in 2004, he also said that at Bagram he had seen “a lot of things they[US personnel] did to people that they thought weren’t telling the truth or werewithholding information. That scared me.”An elderly Afghan man was arrested in his village by US marines in June 2004 anddetained for three days. Noor Mohammad Lala alleged: “Theytold me to take off myshirt. I said ‘How can I do that?’ Then I told myself ‘Take your shirt off.’ When I tookoff my shirt, they told me to undo my belt. I found that very painful. I felt like I washaving a nervous breakdown. In my entire life I’d never exposed myself. With respect,I have a bladder problem and I could not stop urinating. After that I was sohumiliated I couldn’t see for my pain. When they took off my trousers I had my eyesclosed. I was totally disoriented, they stood me up in the container. When they stoodme up like this, they took off all my clothes. I was completely naked, I’m not tellingyou a lie. They told me to look straight ahead, not to look around. While I wasstanding, I’m not lying to you, they kicked my feet apart with their boots and theywere touching me. That’s how it was I did not know what was going on. That’s thesort of treatment I received. That’s what they did. When I looked around there wasonly an interpreter, no one else. He told me to get dressed, my bottom was wet. Iwould not be a Muslim if I lied to you. When I put on my clothes, I rubbed it off. And15

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionthis happened when I’m old, white-bearded with no teeth. And this outrage happenedto me.”Another Afghan national, Syed Nabi Siddiqi, has said that he was ill-treated duringhis 22-day detention in US custody in Gardez, Afghanistan, in July 2003. He says thathe was blindfolded, kicked and beaten, and had his clothes removed: “Thentheyasked me which animals – they made the noise of goats, sheep, dogs, cows – I hadhad sexual activities with. They laughed at me. I said that such actions were againstour Afghan and Islamic tradition, but they again asked me, ‘Which kind of animals doyou want to have sex with?’ Then they…beat me with a stick from the back and kickedme. I still have pains in my back as a result.”After Gardez, Syed Nabi Siddiqi saidthat he was flown to the US air base in Kandahar, where the ill-treatment continued,including when the soldiers “brought dogs close to us, they were biting at us”. Thiscases is currently under investigation by the US military.In a witness statement in legal proceedings in the UK in 2004, former detainee TarekDergoul recalled his detention in Kandahar: “[I]nKandahar I was hooded whilstbeing taken to interrogation and some of the time during interrogation. I wasinterrogated at least three or four times a week for up to seven or eight hours a day.Sometimes I was just left sitting in the interrogation tent with nothing, no food ortoilet facilities. The guards in Kandahar regularly tore up the Qur’an and threw it.My body hair was shaved, including my pubic hair… After three months in KandaharI was flown to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on 1 May 2002… I was stripped naked, givena full body search and pictures were taken of me naked.”Some Guantánamo detainees have been visited by lawyers representing them for theirhabeas corpusappeals in US courts. Unclassified details of the alleged treatment ofBahraini detainee Jum’ah Mohammad Abdul Latif Al Dossari, as provided toAmnesty International by the US lawyers for the detainees: “MrAl Dossari wasarrested in Pakistan and held by Pakistani authorities for several weeks. Mr AlDossari was transferred from Pakistan to Kandahar, Afghanistan via airplane by USauthorities. On the plane, he was shackled by chains on his thighs, waist andshoulders, with his hands tied behind him. The chains were so tight around hisshoulders that he was forced to lean forward at an extreme angle during the entireflight. This caused great pain to Mr Al Dossari’s stomach, where he had had anoperation some years before. When Mr Al Dossari complained about the pain, he washit and kicked in the stomach, causing him to vomit blood. Upon arriving inKandahar, Mr Al Dossari and other detainees were put on a row on the ground in atent. US Marines urinated on the detainees and put cigarettes out on them (Mr AlDossari has scars that are consistent with those that would be caused by cigaretteburns). A US soldier pushed Mr Al Dossari’s head into the ground violently and othersoldiers walked on him…”Mohammad Al Dossari has alleged, among other things,that he was forced to walk barefoot over barbed wire and that his head was pushed tothe ground on broken glass. He has alleged that US soldiers subjected him to electricshocks, death threats, assault and humiliation.Fellow Bahraini detainee Abdullah Al Noaimi has alleged that he was physicallyassaulted by US soldiers in Kandahar air base in Afghanistan, stripped and sexuallyhumiliated. He says that he witnessed detainees being bitten by dogs in Kandahar.Yasin Qasem Muhammad Ismail has alleged that when held in Bagram air base inAfghanistan, US soldiers beat him, kicked him, and stood on his back and knees.

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionAbd Al Malik Abd Al Wahab has said that he had his thumb broken during beatingsby US soldiers in the US air base in Kandahar in Afghanistan. He told his CSRT inOctober 2004 that “we were tortured by beatings in Kandahar”.Turkish national and German resident Murat Kurnaz has alleged that when he washeld in the US air base in Kandahar, interrogators repeatedly forced his head into abucket of cold water for long periods of time, as well as subjecting him to an electricshock on his feet. He has alleged that he was held for days shackled and handcuffedwith his arms secured above his head. On one occasion, he claims that a militaryofficer loaded his gun and pointed it at Murat Kurnaz’s head, screaming at him toadmit to being anal-Qa’idaassociate. Murat Kurnaz also claims to have witnessedother detainee beatings, in one case that he believes may have resulted in thedetainee’s death.The handwritten notes of a US lawyer who met with Kuwaiti detainees inGuantánamo in January 2005 make for similarly disturbing reading:All indicated thatthey had been horribly treated, particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan where theywere first held for many months after being taken into custody (in Kandahar, Kohat,Bagram). Although the words they used were different, the stories they told wereremarkably similar – terrible beatings, hung from wrists and beaten, removal ofclothes, hooding, exposure naked to extreme cold, naked in front of female guards,sexual taunting by both male and female guards/interrogators, some sexual abuse(rectal intrusion), terrible uncomfortable positions for hours. All confirmed that allthis treatment was by Americans… Several said pictures were taken of some of thisabuse...Some of the pictures still exist and are still used by the interrogators. Manyknew that the Americans had killed several people during the interrogations at theseplaces. Several also mentioned the use of electric shocks – like ping pong paddles putunder arms – some had this done; many saw it done. Several said they just could notbelieve Americans could act this way.Libyan national and UK resident Omar Deghayes has alleged that he was subjected totorture and ill-treatment in Pakistan following his arrest there. Following his transferto US custody in Afghanistan, he has alleged that the following took place in Bagramair base where he was held for two months. According to his account recorded by alawyer who visited him in Guantánamo in early 2005:“Omar went for 7-8 dayswithout food in Bagram. Omar was held in a dark room for days on end, without anyaccess to light. Omar and others were locked in boxes with no air and effectivelysuffocated for long periods. Omar was chained to the wall, with his hands high up inthe Strappado position. This caused extreme pain. Omar was forced to live naked forlong periods while he was in Bagram, as part of the humiliation process. Tied sotightly that hands and feet swelled to much above normal size. Forced to move andassume uncomfortable positions while tied this way. Beaten with chains when wouldgo to the bathroom. Forced to stay in positions and to urinate and defecate on self.”Kamal Sadat, a reporter with the BBC World Service in Afghanistan, has said that hewas detained by US forces in Khost in September 2004. He says he was hooded andflown to a US base, whose location he did not know, and where there were detaineesof different nationalities. He was released without explanation three days later. Hehas recalled: “Everytime I was moved within the base, I was hooded again. Everyprisoner has to maintain absolute silence… Prisoners were arriving and leaving allthe time. There were also cells beneath me, under the ground. It was only later Ilearned that I had been held in Bagram. If the BBC had not intervened, I fear I wouldnot have got out.”

USA: US detentions in Afghanistan: An aide-mémoire for continued actionIn a handwritten letter to the CSRT, dated 8 December 2004, Pakistan nationalSaifullah Paracha wrote of his abduction by US agents in Thailand and histransportation to Afghanistan where he was held for more than a year before beingtransferred to Guantánamo where he remains: “Ireached Bangkok InternationalAirport on July 06, 2003 and at the airport I was illegally and immorally arrested –back hand/leg cuffed, black big mask on my head up to neck, was thrown on floor ofstation wagon facing down. I am heart patient / diabetic / high blood pressure / skindisorder, gout; it could have been fatal, there was no human consideration at all.From airport I was taken to unknown place for few days and kept eyes covered, earscover, handcuffed, leg cuffed. After few day I was transported by plane toAfghanistan, under extremely severe bad conditions. I was kept in isolation from July2003 – September 20, 2004 and since September 20, 2004 – I am in isolation cell inGuantanamo Bay Island… Am I being considered human being or animal, or is USAmy God?”At his hearing in front of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal in Guantánamo on 9October 2004, Jordanian national and UK resident Jamil El Banna recalled histransfer from Gambia to Afghanistan in what he described as a “kidnapping” by USagents: “Whenthey came and arrested and handcuffed me, they were wearing allblack. They even covered their heads black… They took me, covered me, put me in avehicle and sent me somewhere. I don’t know where. It was at night. Then from thereto the airport right away… We were in a room like this with about eight men. All withcovered up faces… They cut off my clothes. They were pulling on my hands and mylegs…They put me in an airplane and they made me wear the handcuffs that goaround your body so I would not do anything on the airplane… This is all kidnapping.Yes. They took me underground in the dark. I did not see light for two weeks…Bagram, Afghanistan. Right there in the dark. They put me in the dark. I wassurprised. I did not know what I did wrong or what I did. They starved me; theyhandcuffed me, there was no food… I was under their control. They are the ones whotook me and put me there. They know what they have done. I was surprised that theAmericans would do such a thing. It shocked me.”INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIAT, 1 EASTON STREET, LONDON WC1X 0DW, UNITED KINGDOM

The information in this report is compiled from earlier AI documents. These should be consulted forfurther background on US “war on terror” detention policies and practices and Amnesty International’sanalysis of them. References for the sources of information are contained in these reports. See:USA:Guantánamo and beyond: The continuing pursuit of unchecked executive power,AMR 51/063/2005,May 2005,http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510632005.USA: Human dignity denied:Torture and accountability in the ‘war on terror’,AMR 51/145/2004, 27 October 2004,http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511452004.USA:The threat of a bad example –Undermining international standards as “war on terror” detentions continue,AI Index: AMR51/114/2003, 19 August, 2003,http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511142003.USA:Memorandum to the US Government on the rights of people in US custody in Afghanistan andGuantánamo Bay,AI Index: AMR 51/053/2002, 15 April 2002,http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510532002