16 January 2009
Â
NY Times Letters Editor
It should not be noteworthy when a professional
'company man' (your editorial 10 January 2009 quoting Leon Panetta: "Not a
Company Man") declares that "Torture is illegal..." After all, the US
government signed on to the uncompromisable illegality of torture in 1994, when
it ratified the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment.  Indeed, two years earlier the
US's position on this issue was signed, sealed, and delivered, when we ratified
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that ruled out
deviation of any sort from the absolute prohibition of torture.Â
What has in fact turned out to be noteworthy is
that over the years since 9/11, the US head of state took it upon himself to
sully the object and purpose of that absolute prohibition by custom-ordering a
re-crafted definition of torture. The Convention, including the clear
definition of torture, is respected and enforced by 145 other governments. The
incoming administration's work-plan on this issue writes itself: reinstall
honest compliance with the treaties and laws concerning torture; re-invigorate
procedures for assisting survivors; regain our lead position in the
internationally-agreed system for ending torture; and by doing so robustly,
help restore dignity and honor to the government of the United States of
America.
Â
Sincerely,
Â
Rita
Maran,  Ph.D.,  Lecturer on Human Rights, University
of  California, Berkeley
Author:Â Torture:The Role
of Ideology in the French-Algerian War (Praeger 1989)
16 January 2009
NY Times Letters Editor
It should not be noteworthy when a professional
'company man' (your editorial 10 January 2009 quoting Leon Panetta: "Not a
Company Man") declares that "Torture is illegal..." After all, the US
government signed on to the uncompromisable illegality of torture in 1994, when
it ratified the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment.  Indeed, two years earlier the
US's position on this issue was signed, sealed, and delivered, when we ratified
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that ruled out
deviation of any sort from the absolute prohibition of torture.Â
What has in fact turned out to be noteworthy is
that over the years since 9/11, the US head of state took it upon himself to
sully the object and purpose of that absolute prohibition by custom-ordering a
re-crafted definition of torture. The Convention, including the clear
definition of torture, is respected and enforced by 145 other governments. The
incoming administration's work-plan on this issue writes itself: reinstall
honest compliance with the treaties and laws concerning torture; re-invigorate
procedures for assisting survivors; regain our lead position in the
internationally-agreed system for ending torture; and by doing so robustly,
help restore dignity and honor to the government of the United States of
America.
Â
Sincerely,
Â
Rita
Maran,  Ph.D.,  Lecturer on Human Rights, University
of  California, Berkeley
Author:Â Torture:The Role
of Ideology in the French-Algerian War (Praeger 1989)
