Given President Trump’s enthusiasm, as a presidential candidate, for enhanced interrogation, waterboarding, torture, and “worse,” as well as his eagerness to contrast himself at every opportunity with President Obama, one might have expected to see the use of such methods reinstated after he became President. At the one year mark, however, the issue seems conspicuously absent.
Latest in Interrogation
Last week, the Supreme Court of Israel issued a decision concerning one of the most sensitive areas of counterterrorism policy and practice. The decision considered so-called “pressure techniques” the Israeli Security Agency (the ISA, known colloquially as the Shin Bet) applied during the interrogation of a terrorism suspect in 2007.
In late 2002, Afghan officials arrested Mohammed Jawad and transferred him to American officials. During his six-year stay at Guantanamo, Jawad alleges that he was tortured. Upon being released from federal custody and repatriated to Afghanistan, Jawad sued the government in 2014. Last year on Lawfare, Helen Klein Murillo described the D.C.
In answers to written questions preceding his confirmation hearing, now-CIA Director Mike Pompeo caused concern by indicating a willingness to revisit rules governing military and intelligence interrogations. Specifically, he said he would “consult with experts at the Agency and at other organizations in the U.S.
As Benjamin Wittes and I have noted, the last few weeks of the Obama administration and the first months of the Trump administration generated some activity surrounding the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on interrogation, with counsel for Guantanamo detainees filing motions requesting that the SSCI report be preserved in at least four cases.
Although the White House is now disavowing the draft executive order on detention and interrogation, the document has revived debate on the legal prohibitions against torture and on President Trump’s
Author's Note: I wrote the following in the belief that the draft executive order published yesterday by the Washington Post and analyzed yesterday by the Times and the Post was either the final text or a near-final version.
Last week, Ben posted an order by Judge Royce Lamberth of the D.C. District Court granting a request by counsel for Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri to have a copy of the Senate Intelligence Committee's interrogation report held under seal with the court.
The other day, Quinta and I noted that counsel for Abd al Rahim Al-Nashiri had asked the court in his habeas case to have a copy of the Senate Intelligence Committee's interrogation report filed under seal with the court. Yesterday, Judge Royce Lamberth issued an order doing just that:
Speaking of Guantanamo habeas litigation, which one of us was yesterday, there's been an interesting development in the Al-Nashiri habeas case. This particular habeas case out of Guantanamo has been a sleepy one, since all the action in the Abd al Rahim Al-Nashiri matter has been in his military commission trial and related federal court litigation.