From Amnesty International

Ottawa ‘ Justice Dennis O’Connor has confirmed the worst fears of Organizations with Intervenor Status at the Arar Inquiry: that Canadian officials were complicit in the torture of Maher Arar and other Canadian citizens.

‘Justice O’Connor has documented in astonishing detail how the very officials tasked with protecting the rights of these Canadian citizens failed to live up to that responsibility, and worse yet, were directly involved in passing on questions for interrogations where torture would be used,’ said Alex Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada.

The report details the callous disregard for the very real likelihood that government actions would directly contribute to the torture of these Canadian citizens. In particular, there is chilling reference to an October 10, 2002 memo in which a Foreign Affairs official warns that a decision to send a line of questioning about Abdullah Almalki to Syrian security agencies might ‘involve torture.’ The RCMP chose to ignore the concern and proceeded anyway:

‘The RCMP are ready to send their Syrian counterparts a request that Al Malki be asked questions posed by the RCMP, questions relating to other members of his organization. Both ISI and DMSCUS/HOM [Ambassador Pillarella] have pointed out to the RCMP that such questioning may involve torture. The RCMP are aware of this but have nonetheless decided to send their request’ (Report of the Events Relating to Maher Arar: Analysis and Recommendations, page 209).

Intervenors welcome Justice O’Connor’s recommendation that a further process of ‘independent and credible’ review into the cases of Mr. Abdullah Almalki, Mr. Ahmad El Maati and Mr. Muayyed Nureddin be instituted (Analysis and Recommendations, page 278), and urge the government to act on this recommendation without further delay. These men have waited far too long for answers and accountability.

Organizations intervening at the Arar Commission are also pleased that Justice O’Connor says that his Interim Report should remove any ‘taint or suspicion’ that Mr. Arar has committed any offence or constitutes any threat to the security of Canada (Anaylsis and Recommendations, page 59).

Justice O’Connor is also clearly of the view that Mr. Arar is entitled to compensation and has encouraged the Canadian government to be flexible in how that compensation should be assessed, recognizing the suffering he has been through, the damage of the improper and unfair leaks, his difficulty in finding employment and the impact of the inquiry itself. Justice O’Connor has also signaled that an apology might be appropriate (Analysis and Recommendations, page 362-363).

‘The report offers a staggering catalogue of deficiencies, mistakes and even deliberate wrongdoing, all of which laid the ground for the severe abuses suffered by Mr. Arar and the other three men named in this report,’ said Neve.

Those responsible should be held accountable and the reforms recommended by Justice O’Connor should be immediately implemented in order to guard against future repeats of these tragedies.

Justice O’Connor has also recommended that Canadian agencies involved in national security investigations implement written policies prohibiting racial, religious or ethnic profiling, and training to sensitize those agencies to the realities of Canada’s Muslim and Arab communities. Intervenors urge the government to prioritize the implementation of these recommendations.

By Moazzem Begg in the Herald Tribune

Moazzam Begg is a British Muslim who spent three years in U.S. detention, including two years at Guantanamo before being released in 2005.

A few months ago, I was approached by U.S. military defense attorneys, something I have grown increasingly accustomed to since my release from the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

The request wasn’t from lawyers defending Guantanamo detainees. The defendant was a soldier facing several charges, including detainee abuse at a U.S. detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan. Some of the events surrounding these allegations coincided with my time there during 2002. I’d spoken to members of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command and internal investigation officers who were trying to build a case against other soldiers. So it came as a surprise when lawyers asked me if I would consider being a defense witness.

The then specialist, Damien Corsetti, didn’t mistreat me. He never interrogated me and he always passed by my cage with a smile, often stopping to talk. He even gave me books at a time when they were hard to come by. One of the books, ironically, Heller’s “Catch-22,” is described as “the classic antiwar novel of our time.” I was even allowed to bring it with me to England, where it remains on my bookshelf, next to another book from U.S. soldiers: a military issue of the Bible, in full camouflage jacket.

I often found myself discussing religion with guards and interrogators, some of whom were Christian Evangelists or Southern Baptists. I thought it important to try to explain similarities between the Bible and the Koran, as well as looking at the fundamental differences in belief and perception. Perhaps, I thought, it might help some of my captors appreciate that we all held things sacred.

Last year, when Newsweek published a report alleging the desecration of the Koran by guards in Guant’namo, I was surprised – surprised that the article had materialized so late. Many former prisoners had complained about the abuse well before, including me. However, my personal analysis of the affair was simple: The Koran may be the sacred, unadulterated speech of the Almighty to me and 1.6 billion other Muslims, but to the average soldier it is paper and ink. If, in his or her mind, it was justified to redefine the rules of engagement to include the application of torture then what of a mere book?

A Saudi still in Guantanamo, Ahmed al-Darbi, told me in Bagram that Corsetti had taken out his penis, threatened to rape him and, while pointing to his manhood, screamed, “This is your God!” I have since learned that Corsetti was called “King of Torture” by his fellow soldiers.

Darbi’s allegations were not upheld in court, so my testimony was not required. Oddly enough, there was a time when I was facing my own possible military commission, in which I intended to call U.S. soldiers as defense witnesses. I encountered hundreds of them during my years in captivity. I made friends with some of them, too. Paradoxically, some of these soldiers helped me face the years of isolation and despair as my only friends. One of them was Corsetti.

In his defense, Corsetti’s lawyer is reported to have said: “The president of the United States doesn’t know what the rules are. The secretary of defense doesn’t know what the rules are. But the government expects this Pfc. [private first class] to know what the rules are?”

Corsetti cannot escape culpability by this argument. But it does suggest that responsibility stretches higher up the chain of command. Meanwhile, we continue to pay the price because nobody knows what the rules are.