Justice revises torture definition

ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Justice Department backed off its narrow definition of torture as “excruciating and agonizing pain” by releasing a legal memo rewritten since the Iraqi prison-abuse scandal.

The 17-page memo omitted two of the most controversial assertions made in now-disavowed 2002 Justice Department documents: President Bush, as commander in chief in wartime, had authority superseding U.S. anti-torture laws; and U.S. personnel had several legal defenses against criminal liability in such cases.

The new document says torture violates U.S. and international law.

“Consideration of the bounds of any such authority would be inconsistent with the president’s unequivocal directive that United States personnel not engage in torture,” said the memo from Daniel Levin, acting chief of the Office of Legal Counsel, to Deputy Attorney General James Comey.

Critics in Congress and many legal experts say the original documents set up a legal framework that led to abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, in Afghanistan and at the U.S. prison camp for terror suspects at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After the Iraqi prison abuses came to light, the Justice Department in June disavowed its previous legal reasoning and set to work on the replacement document.

The White House insisted yesterday that the United States has operated under the spirit of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit violence, torture and humiliating treatment.

“It has been U.S. policy from the start to treat detainees humanely and in accordance with the Geneva Conventions or under the spirit of the Conventions where they do not apply,” said White House spokesman Trent Duffy.

The Justice Department memo, dated Thursday, was released less than a week before the Senate Judiciary Committee was to consider Mr. Bush’s nomination of his chief White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales, to replace John Ashcroft as attorney general.

Democrats have said they would question Mr. Gonzales closely on memos he wrote that were similar to the now-disavowed Justice Department documents that critics said appeared to justify torture.

The release also coincided with continuing revelations of potential detainee abuse, most recently a series of memos from FBI agents uncovered in an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit charging instances of Defense Department wrongdoing during a variety of interrogations.

The new Justice Department memo sets a far different tone, beginning with this sentence: “Torture is abhorrent both to American law and values and to international norms.”

The document, again directly contradicting the previous version, says torture need not be limited to pain “equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.”

Instead, the memo concludes that anti-torture laws passed by Congress equate torture with physical suffering “even if it does not involve severe physical pain” but still must be more than “mild and transitory.” That can include mental suffering under certain circumstances, but it would not have to last for months or years, as the previous document said.

“This damage need not be permanent, but it must continue for a prolonged period of time,” according to the memo.

Story Continues →