In the infamous torture memos of , Yoo and Bybee, authorised “enhanced interrogation” techniques (EITs), acts previously recognised by. Former Justice Department lawyer John Yoo wrote in the New York Times op-ed that he had “grave concerns about Mr. Trump’s uses of. John Yoo defends his work crafting the legal justification for harsh CIA interrogation techniques and slams the Senate “Torture Report.”.
|Published (Last):||18 January 2009|
|PDF File Size:||6.10 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.28 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
John Yoo – Wikipedia
Webarchive template wayback links CS1 maint: Based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Ashcroft v. It concludes that torture does not include “other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” because such language is found in a different article than the definition of torture, and because it appears that the convention does not intend to criminalize such action, but instead discourage it.
Retrieved April 17, Douglas Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine Universityhas stated that ultimately the memo “caused no long-term legal damage because it was redrafted and is not legally binding”. War in Afghanistan Iraq War Symbolism of terrorism. All of these memoranda have been the focus of considerable controversy over executive power, government practices, and the treatment of detainees during the Bush administration. The New York Times Magazine.
Archived from the original PDF on November 6, Unfortunately, he fails to mention any of the negative consequences of the policies. How could this have happened? The statement to the contrary from the August 1,memorandum, quoted above, has been withdrawn and superseded, along with the entirety of the memorandum, and in any event I do not find that statement persuasive. Yoo was a law clerk for Judge Laurence H.
A memo on torture to John Yoo
Debate Over the CWC: Bybee was, however, investigated by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility see below. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit]”. Bradburytorturw on the legality of the authorized techniques if agents followed certain jonh. It states that after substantial research of the individual’s background, behavior and journal entries, interrogators believe he does not suffer from any psychological disorders or disturbances.
He may not have a law degree or wield political power, but he has “personally led, witnessed and supervised waterboarding of hundreds of people” during his stint as a Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape SERE School instructor. In his column in the Los Angeles Times Scheer wrote, “Was it as a reward nohn such bold legal thinking that only months later Bybee was appointed to one of the top judicial benches in the country?
Yoo concludes the letter by stating, “It is possible that an ICC official would ignore the clear limitations imposed by the Rome Statute, or at least disagree with the President’s interpretation of [the Geneva Convention]. Bush’s “assertion” that “neither members of the al Qaeda terrorist network nor Taliban soldiers were entitled to the legal status of prisoners of war under the [Geneva Convention],” and therefore planned interrogation methods would not constitute a violation of the Geneva Convention, or war crime.
He earned a B. Retrieved 1 March Yoo writes that, in his opinion, “[t]he United States’ campaign against al Qaeda is an attack on a non-state terrorist organization, not a civilian population. Bush continues to wield power”San Francisco Chroniclepage E-2 of print edition, September 10, The memo states that, through an analysis of those cases, “courts are likely to take a totality-of-the-circumstances approach, and will look to an entire course of conduct, to determine whether certain acts will violate Section A.
Law professor, former official in the United States Department of Justice. Part three summarizes various techniques within the case law to outline the kind of conduct that the courts have previously found to be torture.
General Mukasey, just following orders is no defense!
As the memo quotes from the definition of torture in the Convention Against Torture, it compares that definition to the one found in the U. It also concludes that “actions taken as part of the interrogation Archived from the original on 21 January In each of the cases that I have evaluated, the physical and psychological evidence of torture is consistent with the UN Convention Against Torture’s definition of torture — as well as Yoo and Bybee’s definition of torture.
In DecemberYoo’s memo on permissible interrogation techniques, also known as the Bybee memowas repudiated as legally unsound by the OLC, then under the direction of Jack Goldsmith. The fact that Yoo and Bybee raised the thresholds for physical and mental pain of torture without any provisions to assess possible evidence of torture suggests criminal negligence and possibly the intent to commit and conceal a systematic policy of torture.
He then criticized Democrats in Congress for not suing Clinton as they had sued presidents Bush and Reagan to stop the use of force abroad. Retrieved December 1, He later said he was “astonished” by the “deeply flawed” and “sloppily reasoned” legal analysis in the memos. During the debate, Cassel asked Yoo. In foreign relations, Yoo has argued that the original understanding of the Constitution gives the President the authority to use armed force abroad without congressional authorization, subject to Congress’s power of the purse; that treaties do not generally have domestic legal force without implementing legislation; and that courts are functionally ill-suited to intervene in foreign policy disputes between the President and Congress.
The memorandum describes in detail each of the techniques proposed as generally used, including attention grasp, wallingfacial holdinsult slap, cramped confinement large and small and with and without an insectwall standingstress positions, sleep deprivation, and waterboarding.
Retrieved 18 January They were repudiated by President Barack Obama on January 22,shortly after he took office. HaynesGeneral Counsel of the Department of Defense. House of Representatives House Committee on the Judiciary.
Although the memo states that nowhere in the case law can a clear interpretation or definition of torture mejos found, because the cases it did find were all regarding extreme acts, it concludes that this confirms the memo’s definition of torture. Retrieved March 21, But, later that year, an opinion was issued by his successor at the Tofture, that changed the very narrow definition of torture from the original legal opinions of the Bush administration on this topic.
Retrieved 16 January He resigned he said, for several reasons but the main one was that, as a result of withdrawing the Torture Memos, “important people inside the administration had come to question my His preemptive rush, in a recent op-ed article for the Wall Street Journalto vindicate the Bush administration’s torture policies that he and Jay Bybee created betrays his guilt for approving one of the most reprehensible policies in US history — a policy of systematic torture that not only failed to provide actionable intelligence, but undermined the security of the United States.