Terror turn in American human rights policy

The principles they have so religiously safeguarded include the rule of law, a free press, an independent judiciary and respect for human rights.

But when national interests are at stake, these Jeffersonian democratic principles have always been in danger of being thrown overboard.

Arguably, there could be a justification for this political about-face. But no such justification has been offered to any Third World nation violating democratic principles in the national interest or in its fight against terrorism.

The United States, which rightly condemned the conviction and execution of author Ken Saro-Wiwa by a special military court in Nigeria and the conviction of a US citizen Lori Benson for terrorism by a military court in Peru, is now justifying its own decision to set up military commissions to try non-citizens.

Last week the White House announced an Executive Order permitting the trial of non-citizens by special military commissions with extraordinary powers that threaten to violate some of the most basic due process rights.

Vice President Dick Cheney justified the military tribunals on the ground that terrorists were not lawful combatants and did not deserve the safeguards of traditional American jurisprudence.

"They don't deserve to be treated as prisoners of war. They don't deserve the same guarantees and safeguards that would be used for an American citizen going through the normal judicial process," he argued.

According to experts in military law quoted by the New York Times last week, the proposed tribunals would severely limit the rights of a defendant even beyond those in military trials.

They also pointed out that the trials did not provide for proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Executive Order, which has come at a time when more than 1,000 suspects mostly of Middle Eastern origin have been held without trial, has triggered a firestorm of criticism by civil libertarians and human rights organisations in the US.

Laura Murphy, of the American Civil Liberties Union, says her organisation is "deeply disturbed" by the Order and has called on Congress to exercise oversight powers.

Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch is even harsher in his criticism. "Under this Executive Order, a defendant could be sentenced to death without a public trial, a presumption of innocence, a right to appeal, or even proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt," he warned.

Roth also points out that the US has long condemned such acts committed by other countries, including the use of military courts to convict suspected terrorists in Egypt and trials of foreigners, including American citizens, for espionage by closed tribunals in Russia.

"The next time the United States criticises a foreign dictator for trying a dissident — or even an American citizen — before a military court, this is going to be thrown back in America's face," he said.

And if this Executive Order is implemented, he argued, it will do permanent damage to America's ability to champion human rights around the world.

Last year the US argued that people accused of war crimes deserved full process protection, including alleged war criminals in Bosnia and Rwanda.

"How can the US credibly make that argument when others are the victims, if it refuses to act that way itself when Americans are the victims?" asks Roth.

Last month UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson expressed serious concern over the erosion of human rights in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the US.

She told delegates that some countries — which she refused to identify by name — were introducing measures that may violate core human rights safeguards.

She said that non-violent activities are being considered as terrorism in some countries while "excessive measures" are being taken to suppress or restrict individual rights. These restrictive measures cover privacy rights, fair trial, the right to seek asylum, political participation, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. 

"We should be mindful of such fundamental principles as the presumption of innocence, non-discrimination and due process of law," she added.

Last month, the U.S. Congress passed legislation giving sweeping powers to law enforcement officials enabling them to conduct wire taps, intercept email, and monitor phone conversations of suspected or potential terrorists.

Under the new law, immigrants can also be detained without charges — but not indefinitely.

Robinson also said that governments, in their efforts to fight terrorism, must avoid innocent people becoming the victims of counter-terrorism measures.

"This requires that government action in this area be guided by human rights principles", she added.