Prosecuting Bush

10/24/2005 3:30:00 PM GMT

Last year, and in its battle to have George W. Bush face criminal charges for torture, Lawyers Against the War (LAW), an international group of jurists based in Canada, laid charges against the American President, accusing him of aiding, abetting, and counseling the commission of torture

That was during Bush’s visit to Canada on November of that year.

The charge are based on well-known abuses used against suspects held in U.S. custody in Abu Ghraib jail near the Iraqi capital as well as similar abuses at the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, including Canadian minor Omar Khadr; held in Cuba for more than four years.

Such brutal tactics used against the prisoners during interrogations first surfaced in April last year, with the release of appalling and sickening photographs depicting the psychological and physical sexual torture of the Iraqi prisoners at the hands of the American guards of Abu Ghraib jail. The photographs shocked the world, however, only low-ranking officials and few soldiers have been indicted in those crimes.

Similar interrogation methods are being used at Guantanamo prison to force detainees admit having link to Al Qaeda or any other “terror” network. Those tactics included intimidating the prisoners using dogs, desecrating the holy Qur’an, Islam holy book, since most of the prisoners are Muslims, as well as denying them food and sleep. Also used as interrogation methods were strip searches, including invasive and often intentionally painful examination of the mouth, anus, testicles or vagina, frequently accompanied by verbal or physical sexual abuse.

But the Canadian government used a claim of diplomatic immunity and blocked the torture charges laid under the Canadian Criminal Code against President George W. Bush.

Judge William Kitchen declared the charges ‘a nullity’.

“Of course, they’re not a nullity”, said Professor Michael Mandel, co-chair of LAW, who criticized the decision as “irregular in procedure and wrong in substance.” “These charges were properly laid and backed up by powerful evidence. The government didn’t deny that evidence because it couldn’t deny it. Diplomatic immunity is purely procedural. It doesn’t affect the validity of the charges, only whether they can be proceeded with, for the time being, in a foreign court, in this case a Canadian court. Even if Bush has immunity, it’s only temporary and it won’t shield him or anyone in his administration from Canadian law, or any other law, when they leave office. That the Canadian government would try to hush this up by hiding Bush behind diplomatic immunity was only to be expected. Paul Martin invited Bush here to ingratiate himself with the President, despite the President’s crimes against our laws and against international law, despite even his inadmissibility as a war criminal under Canada’s immigration laws – above all, despite the unending human disaster the President’s illegal ‘war of choice’ has brought to the people of Iraq.”

Vancouver lawyer Gail Davidson, who laid the charges on behalf of LAW, said “We have a lot of objections to the way these charges were handled. We can’t see the legal basis for sealing the courtroom and excluding the press and the public. We think the claim of immunity was premature and exaggerated, and the quashing of the charges not authorized by the law.”
In December 6th 2004, a secret hearing held Provincial Court rejected charges against Bush on the basis of arguments by the Attorney General of British Columbia that the visiting president was shielded from prosecution by diplomatic immunity- A ban on publishing anything that was to do with the case was imposed the same day.

But last week, the Supreme Court of British Columbia cancelled the ban on publication, stated an editorial on CounterPunch.

"This is a very important victory", Gail Davidson said, "because it ensures that the proceedings will be scrutinized by people in Canada and throughout the world, to make sure that the law is applied fairly and properly and, above all, to make sure that Bush doesn't get away with torture."

"The American legal system seems incapable of bringing him to justice and there are no international courts with jurisdiction. So it's up to Canada to enforce the law that everybody has signed on to but nobody else seems willing to apply."

Mr. Davidson, Howard Rubin, and Jason Gratl and Micheal Vonn representing B.C. Civil Liberties entered courtroom 55 of the BC Supreme Court in Vancouver hoping the publication ban will be finally lifted- after a session that lasted for 45 minutes they emerged successful.

"I don't know that I would call it a victory quite yet," said Ms. Davidson, "but it is at least a step in the right direction. People deserve to know what is happening here."

"Many Canadians don't realize that we have not only the right but the responsibility to pursue these charges, it is a responsibility that the Canadian government owes not only to the people of Canada, but to the people of the world. The 1987 Convention Against Torture [And Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment] binds us to this action." Canada ratified the UN Convention on Torture along with 139 other nations; promising to protect the inalienable right of all the world's citizens to live a life free of torture. "

The next hearing in the case will bee on November 25th 2005, at the B.C. Supreme Court, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver, B.C.

Link Here