U.S. to Block U.N. Torture Vote
Wed Jul 24, 1:43 PM ET
By DAFNA LINZER, Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Concerned about the possibility of independent visits to U.S. civilian and military prisons, the United States sought Wednesday to block a vote on a U.N. plan meant to enforce a convention on torture.
The United States wants negotiations on the plan reopened, a move human rights groups say could kill the proposal, which they believe is essential to ending torture around the world.
Debate on the anti-torture plan was underway Wednesday in the U.N. Economic and Social Council, known as ECOSOC, and a vote was expected in the afternoon.
However, the United States had submitted a proposal to block the vote and it wasn't clear whether the council would agree to the U.S. request for open-ended talks on "the current text and the process connected with it."
Among the U.S. concerns is language that could allow for international and independent visits to U.S. prisons and to terror suspects being held by the U.S. military at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said allowing outside observers into state prisons would infringe on states' rights.
Another problem, the official said, is the issue of access to suspected al-Qaida and Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan and being held in the war on terrorism.
The anti-torture proposal enjoys wide support among Western European and Latin American countries. But conservative Muslim states that shun outside intervention are likely to back the U.S. request in order to stave off a vote.
Human rights advocates argue that the optional protocol is essential to enforce an international convention on torture passed 13 years ago and since ratified by about 130 countries, including the United States. Countries are supposed to enforce the convention on their own, but rights groups argue that that isn't working everywhere.
"A vote against the optional protocol would be a disastrous setback in the fight against torture," said Martin MacPherson, head of Amnesty International's legal program. People were tortured or ill-treated by authorities in 111 countries last year, according to an Amnesty report.
Activists fear that if the United States succeeds in reopening the negotiations, "it will mean a kiss of death," for the protocol, said Rory Mungoven of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
"This protocol would create a more pro-active mechanism that includes visits to prisons and other preventive measures which would help enforce the convention," Mungoven said.
The protocol, which has been under negotiation for a decade, would be an optional, supplementary document. According to the text, the objective of the protocol is "to establish a system of regular visits undertaken by independent and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment."
If the protocol is approved, it moves to the General Assembly where it would need to be approved by a majority of the 190 member states. Then, it will require 20 ratifications before it can go into force.
Your thoughts?
Melon
Wed Jul 24, 1:43 PM ET
By DAFNA LINZER, Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Concerned about the possibility of independent visits to U.S. civilian and military prisons, the United States sought Wednesday to block a vote on a U.N. plan meant to enforce a convention on torture.
The United States wants negotiations on the plan reopened, a move human rights groups say could kill the proposal, which they believe is essential to ending torture around the world.
Debate on the anti-torture plan was underway Wednesday in the U.N. Economic and Social Council, known as ECOSOC, and a vote was expected in the afternoon.
However, the United States had submitted a proposal to block the vote and it wasn't clear whether the council would agree to the U.S. request for open-ended talks on "the current text and the process connected with it."
Among the U.S. concerns is language that could allow for international and independent visits to U.S. prisons and to terror suspects being held by the U.S. military at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said allowing outside observers into state prisons would infringe on states' rights.
Another problem, the official said, is the issue of access to suspected al-Qaida and Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan and being held in the war on terrorism.
The anti-torture proposal enjoys wide support among Western European and Latin American countries. But conservative Muslim states that shun outside intervention are likely to back the U.S. request in order to stave off a vote.
Human rights advocates argue that the optional protocol is essential to enforce an international convention on torture passed 13 years ago and since ratified by about 130 countries, including the United States. Countries are supposed to enforce the convention on their own, but rights groups argue that that isn't working everywhere.
"A vote against the optional protocol would be a disastrous setback in the fight against torture," said Martin MacPherson, head of Amnesty International's legal program. People were tortured or ill-treated by authorities in 111 countries last year, according to an Amnesty report.
Activists fear that if the United States succeeds in reopening the negotiations, "it will mean a kiss of death," for the protocol, said Rory Mungoven of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
"This protocol would create a more pro-active mechanism that includes visits to prisons and other preventive measures which would help enforce the convention," Mungoven said.
The protocol, which has been under negotiation for a decade, would be an optional, supplementary document. According to the text, the objective of the protocol is "to establish a system of regular visits undertaken by independent and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment."
If the protocol is approved, it moves to the General Assembly where it would need to be approved by a majority of the 190 member states. Then, it will require 20 ratifications before it can go into force.
Your thoughts?
Melon
