French prosecutors throw out Rumsfeld torture case

PARIS (Reuters) - The Paris prosecutors' office has dismissed a suit against Donald Rumsfeld accusing the former U.S. defense secretary of torture, human rights groups who brought the case said on Friday.

The plaintiffs, who included the French-based International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH) and the U.S. Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), said Rumsfeld had authorized interrogation techniques that led to rights abuses.

The FIDH said it had received a letter from the prosecutors' office ruling that Rumsfeld benefited from a "customary" immunity from prosecution granted to heads of state and government and foreign ministers, even after they left office.

It said in a statement it was "astonished at such a mistaken argument" and said customary immunity from prosecution did not exist under international law.

The Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq hit the headlines in April 2004 when details of physical abuse and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers were made public, badly damaging the reputation of the U.S. military.

Former prisoners at the U.S. detention camp in Guantanamo Bay are suing Rumsfeld and 10 military commanders, alleging torture and violations of their religious rights during their detention there.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Constitutional_Rights

“The Center for Constitutional Rights[1] (CCR) is a non-profit legal advocacy organization based in New York City, New York, U.S., founded in 1966 by American attorney William Kunstler.

Since 9/11, CCR has been best known for bringing a variety of cases challenging the Bush administration’s detention and interrogation practices in the “Global War on Terror”:

* CCR brought and won the landmark case Rasul v. Bush (2004), establishing that Guantanamo detainees have the right of access to the federal courts.

* CCR filed a class-action complaint on behalf of the hundreds of so-called “special interest” detainees rounded up in the wake of 9/11 attacks, and subject to a hold-until-cleared policy whereby they would be held in detention without probable cause, even after they had final deportation orders, until they had been cleared by the FBI of any connection to the attacks, Turkmen v. Ashcroft, 2006 WL 1662663 (E.D.N.Y. June 14, 2006).

* CCR represents Canadian citizen Maher Arar in his suit against federal officials over their actions that resulted in his transfer to Syria for 374 days of detention and torture, Arar v. Ashcroft, 414 F. Supp.2d 250 (E.D.N.Y. 2006).

* CCR brought one of the first two suits challenging the NSA warrantless surveillance program, Center for Constitutional Rights v. Bush.

Other prominent areas of litigation include:

* In 1988, obtained permanent injunction creating buffer zone around abortion clinics where anti-abortion group “Operation Rescue” could not approach women seeking medical services, NOW v. Terry.

* In 1989, CCR lawyers won in the Supreme Court the case establishing that flag burning is expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment, Texas v. Johnson.

* Since 1998, CCR has brought a series of cases successfully challenging the federal material support statute, Humanitarian Law Project v. Reno.

* In 1999, continuing a series of clashes with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, CCR secured the release of Hany Kiareldeen in a precedent-setting case on the use of secret evidence in deportation trials.”

(OK, they get 10 points for fighting Janet Reno.)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.