Elizabeth Holtzman, lawyer, former District Attorney, and Member of Congress, and someone who participated in the Nixon impeachment process that led to his resignation, believes "higher-ups" responsible for torture can indeed be held accountable. Some of the points she makes in the July 28 Nation are:
If the public and the media insist on thorough investigations and appropriate punishments for those implicated--all the way up the chain of command--they can prevail.
No less a figure than Alberto Gonzales, then-White House counsel to George W. Bush and now US Attorney General, expressed deep concern about possible prosecutions under the War Crimes Act of 1996 for American mistreatment of Afghanistan war detainees.This relatively obscure statute makes it a federal crime to violate certain provisions of the Geneva Conventions.
There are tantalizing suggestions that Bush may have condoned or possibly authorized coercive interrogation techniques.
For example, a May 22, 2004, FBI agent's memo about interrogations in Iraq, made public under the Freedom of Information Act, repeatedly cites an executive order issued by President Bush that authorized "sleep deprivation, stress positions, loud music, etc."
In addition, President Bush's oft-quoted executive order of February 7, 2002, calling for detainees to be treated humanely, by its very terms does not apply to the CIA. That leaves open the question of what standards of interrogation the President laid out for the CIA and whether his failure to impose the requirement of humane treatment on the CIA signaled permission for that agency to engage in torture or inhuman treatment of detainees.
To resolve the question, then, of the responsibility of higher-ups for torture and inhuman treatment in Iraq, there needs to be full disclosure of directives issued by President Bush and other top officials on the treatment of detainees and a full inquiry into what they knew about the serious mistreatment of detainees and what steps they took to stop the mistreatment once it came to their attention.
The claim that a President, whether Bush or any other President, is above the law strikes at the very heart of our democracy. It was the centerpiece of President Nixon's defense in Watergate--one that was rejected by the courts and lay at the foundation of the articles of impeachment voted against him by the House Judiciary Committee.
If this issue were seriously covered by the press, and the public began to express concern about it, Congress would be much more likely to initiate efforts to investigate and hold higher-ups accountable. T
The best outcome would be to have full Congressional hearings (such as the Senate Watergate hearings) or a fully independent inquiry conducted by a commission such as the 9/11 panel. It is significant that some Republicans and Democrats are finally calling for the creation of such a commission.
That commission should have the power to seek all documents (including presidential documents) respecting the treatment of detainees, and to question higher-ups, including Secretary Rumsfeld and the President himself.
In the final analysis, there is no sure way to compel the government to investigate itself or to hold high-level government officials accountable under applicable criminal statutes. But if the public does not seek to have it happen, it will not happen.
What do I think would do the trick?
I'd like to see a coalition of public figures headed by Elizabeth Holtzman and including any and all "ordinary" Americans raising these issues and pressuring the media to cover them and Congress to respond. We want to know, don't we?
