obligations and U.S. domestic law and have “immediate and damaging consequences.”118
In the face of strong public criticism, the House Republican leadership amended this
section of the bill and deleted the exemption from the Convention against Torture
protection against refoulement to torture. Instead, they included a provision that retained
the ban on removals that would violate the Convention against Torture, but added
draconian detention provisions for certain classes of non-citizens who are granted this
protection. These detention provisions lacked adequate standards and failed to provide
for judicial review to safeguard against abuse.119 The provisions were not included in the
legislation that was eventually passed in January 2005.120
Torture Outsourcing Prevention Act: Markey Bill
Representative Edward J. Markey, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from
the Democratic Party, has been a leading opponent of the practice of renditions in the
U.S. Congress and has also argued that diplomatic assurances from abusive regimes are
inherently unreliable. In February 2005, Markey introduced a bill entitled the “Torture
Outsourcing Prevention Act (H.R. 952)”.121 The bill reaffirms the absolute prohibition
against torture and refoulement and states that “it is critically important for that all
transfers of individuals to other countries occur with full due process of law and in
conformity with the obligations of the United States under article 3 of the Convention
against Torture.”122 The bill specifically addresses the ineffectiveness of diplomatic
assurances against torture:
The reliance on diplomatic assurances from a government that it will not
torture or ill-treat a person returned to that government is an ineffective
safeguard for protecting persons from torture or ill-treatment.
Assurances from a government known to engage in systematic torture
are inherently unreliable. There is strong evidence that governments
such as Egypt, Syria, and Uzbekistan have violated such assurances they
have provided.123
118
Letter to members of the U.S. House of Representatives from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International,
Human Rights First, Physicians for Human Rights and other human rights groups asking members to oppose
the offending provisions and have them struck from the bill, September 30, 2004, copy on file with Human
Rights Watch.
119
9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act of 2004 (H.R. 10) [online] http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/query/D?c108:1:./temp/~c108Qm13YF:: (retrieved April 6, 2005).
120
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Public Law 108-458, January 7, 2005 [online]
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:4:./temp/~c1088oKsSS:: (retrieved March 29, 2005).
121
Press Release, “Markey Introduces Bill to Prevent Outsourcing of Torture,” February 17, 2005 [online]
http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_human_rights_pr050217.pdf (retrieved February 23, 2005).
122
Torture Outsourcing Prevention Act (H.R. 952), F:\M9\MARKEY_017.XML, Sec. 2(14) [online]
http://www.theorator.com/bills109/hr952.html (retrieved April 6, 2005).
123
Ibid., Sec. 2(15).
41
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH VOL. 17 NO. 4(D)
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents