U.S. SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY

Leahy Seeks Gonzales’ Cooperation On Torture Policy Answers

 [(TUESDAY, Dec. 7) – In a speech delivered on the Senate Floor Tuesday morning, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) spelled out the cooperation he expects from White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, during his upcoming confirmation hearings to be attorney general, in answering questions about the Bush Administration’s practices and policies regarding torture and the treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody overseas, and on other subjects.  Leahy, the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will consider the Gonzales nomination, has repeatedly asked for disclosure of pertinent documents on the Administration’s policies governing treatment and interrogation of prisoners in U.S. custody and cited letters to Gonzales about his role in developing those policies that remain unanswered.  Leahy’s remarks are below.  His letter to Gonzales follows.]

 __________________________________ 

Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy,
Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee,
On the Nomination Of Alberto Gonzales To Be Attorney General
Senate Floor
December 7, 2004

Soon after we return in January, the Senate Judiciary Committee will begin consideration of the nomination of Alberto Gonzales for the position of Attorney General of the United States.  I met with him on November 17, soon after his designation as the President’s nominee, in preparation for our hearings.  I look forward to working with Senator Specter and the other Members of the Judiciary Committee to ensure prompt, fair and thorough hearings on this important nomination in early January. 

There is no secret that Judge Gonzales will be called upon to explain not only his vision of the role of the Attorney General and to distinguish it from that of the White House Counsel, but also the role he has played in formulating the Administration’s policies on the treatment and interrogation of prisoners in U.S. custody overseas.  The scandal of Abu Ghraib, allegations of mistreatment at Guantanamo and investigations and charges from cases in Iraq and Afghanistan are serious matters with lingering questions and unresolved accountability in their wake.

 The Bush Administration circled the wagons long ago and has continually maintained that the abuses were the work of ‘a few bad apples.’  But we know that the photos from Abu Ghraib do not depict an isolated incident.  Abuses have occurred in many locations, including Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, and in a number of other facilities within Iraq. 

 I have long said that somewhere in the upper reaches of the Executive Branch a process was set in motion that rolled forward until it produced this scandal.  Even without a truly independent investigation, we now know that the responsibility for abuse runs high up into the chain of command.  Senior officials in the White House, the Justice Department and the Pentagon set in motion a systematic effort to minimize, distort and even ignore our laws, policies and agreements on torture and the treatment of prisoners.  Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and, later, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, authorized the use of techniques that were contrary to both U.S. military manuals and international law.  Former CIA Director Tenet requested and Secretary Rumsfeld approved the secret detention of a “ghost detainee” in Iraq so that he could be hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.  These issues are of significant concern and ones on which the Administration has been less than forthcoming. 

 In letters dated May 17 and June 15 of this year, long before the election, long before the resignation of John Ashcroft and long before he was designated by the President as his nominee, I asked Judge Gonzales to describe his role in both the interpretation of the law and the development of policies that led to what I and many others consider to have been a disregard for the rule of law.  Those letters remain unanswered to this day. 

 I have repeatedly emphasized to Judge Gonzales the need for responsiveness and accountability in these matters.  Last Friday, I sent Judge Gonzales a letter reiterating my concerns and emphasizing the importance of full disclosure during this confirmation process.  I urge him to cooperate with all Members of the Judiciary Committee on the full range of issues of oversight and accountability that come before us, something that his predecessor did not do.  That lack of oversight, lack of accountability and lack of responsiveness should not continue.     

 I ask unanimous consent to include my December 3, 2004, letter to Judge Gonzales in the Record.

_____________________

 [Leahy letter to Gonzales follows:]

 December 3, 2004

The Honorable Alberto R. Gonzales
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, DC  20500

Dear Judge Gonzales:

I enjoyed our preliminary meeting and look forward to your confirmation hearings.  In following up on our meeting, and to give you and your staff ample opportunity to prepare for the hearings, I write to reiterate several concerns that I have raised in prior discussions and correspondence.  When we met on November 17, 2004, I said that these issues will be raised, by myself and other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, during the upcoming hearings.  Based on our conversation, I am encouraged by your willingness to answer questions about your role and your views in these matters.

Photographs and reports of prisoner abuse in Iraq and other locations show an interrogation and detention system operating contrary to U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions.  In addition to the abhorrent images from the Abu Ghraib prison that were published last spring, actions that have occurred with Administration approval include the forcible rendition of individuals to nations where they may face torture, and the hiding of “ghost detainees” from the International Committee of the Red Cross.  Reports of abuse continue to emerge.  Just this week, The New York Times reported that the Red Cross has charged U.S. military authorities with using physical and psychological coercion “tantamount to torture” on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.  The Washington Post is reporting that in December 2003 Army generals in Iraq were warned in a confidential report that members of an elite military and CIA task force were abusing detainees.  According to The Post, the report concluded that certain arrest and detention practices could be deemed to be “technically” illegal.

In letters dated May 17 and June 15 of this year, I asked you to describe your role in both the interpretation of the law and the development of policies that led to what I and many others consider to have been a disregard for the rule of law.  These letters remain unanswered. 

My concerns regarding the abuse of prisoners in U.S. custody did not begin with these letters.  I have been seeking answers from the Administration for well over a year, before the abuses at Abu Ghraib came to light.  In a very few cases my questions were answered, but with information that later proved to be less than accurate.  For example, in a news conference on June 22, 2004, you stated, “In Iraq, it has always been U.S. position that Geneva applies.  From the early days of the conflict, both the White House and the Department of Defense have been very public and clear about that.”

However, an October 24, 2004, article in The Washington Post revealed yet another Justice Department memo authorizing actions that potentially violate the Geneva Conventions.  The draft memo, dated March 19, 2004, apparently was written to authorize the CIA to transfer detainees out of Iraq for interrogation – a practice expressly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.  According to the memo’s cover letter, it was drafted at your request.

In another example, a June 25, 2003, letter from Department of Defense General Counsel William Haynes stated that the United States was adhering to its international obligations including those under the Convention Against Torture.  We later learned of an August 1, 2002, Department of Justice memorandum that twisted the definition of torture in unrecognizable ways.  That memo was addressed to you.  We also learned months later of the rendition of a Canadian-Syrian citizen to Syria, despite his fear of being tortured there, and despite the Syrian government’s well-documented history of torture.  Unnamed CIA officials told the press that this man was in fact tortured in Syria.

The Committee and the Senate will want to know your role in these situations and your views with regard to the development of the legal justifications that appear to underlie so many of these actions.  You will be called upon to explain in detail your role in developing policies related to the interrogation and treatment of foreign prisoners.  The American public and the Senate that will be called upon to confirm your appointment deserve to know how a potential Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer in the nation, will interpret and enforce the laws and how you will develop policy. 

We want to know what the current policy on torture is, but since the Administration disavowed the August 1, 2002, memo, no public statement of policy has replaced it.  Questions remain unanswered on a host of issues.  Requests to the White House and the Department of Justice for relevant documents – including my requests to you in May and June of this year – have been ignored or rejected.  I urge you and the Administration to provide the documents that have been requested by myself and others without further delay so that the hearings will be well informed.

Another key concern you will be called upon to discuss is how you view the duties and responsibilities of the Attorney General.  As we discussed, I view the White House Counsel position and that of the Attorney General as quite distinct.  You may well have viewed this President as your “client” while serving him at the White House, although the courts do not recognize an attorney-client privilege in that setting.  We will want to know how differently you will act and view your responsibilities as the Attorney General of the United States. 

Finally, I encourage you to commit to cooperating with all members of the Judiciary Committee on issues of oversight and accountability.  In the 108th Congress, the Judiciary Committee failed to fulfill its oversight responsibilities.  Accountability and improving government performance are sound and long established purposes of congressional oversight, and accountability has been lacking on these and other crucial issues.  With a new Congress, and a new Attorney General, I expect a return to the diligent oversight envisioned by our Founders to ensure that the Executive Branch remains accountable to the American people.

Our meeting was a constructive beginning at the start of the confirmation process, and I look forward to your hearing early next month.  In the meantime, Marcelle and I send our best wishes to you and your family and hope that you have a restful and rewarding holiday season. 

Sincerely,

PATRICK LEAHY
Ranking Democratic Member

 # # # # #