|
|
INTER -
AMERICAN COMMISSION ON
HUMAN RIGHTS
COMISIÓN INTERAMERICANA DE DERECHOS HUMANOS
COMISSÃO INTERAMERICANA DE DIREITOS HUMANOS
COMMISSION
INTERAMÉRICAINE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME
ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN
STATES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2 0 0 0 6 U.S.A.
NAME: DETAINEES
AT GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA
COUNTRY: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
DATE: MARCH 12, 2002
PERTINENT PARTS OF DECISION ON
REQUEST FOR PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES:
After careful deliberation on this request, the Commission decided during its 114th regular period of sessions [1] to adopt precautionary measures, according to which we ask Your Excellency’s government to take the urgent measures necessary to have the legal status of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay determined by a competent tribunal. Given the significance and implications of this request to and for the United States and the detainees concerned, the Commission wishes to articulate the basis upon which it reached this decision.
The Commission notes preliminarily that its authority to receive and grant requests for precautionary measures under Article 25(1) of its Rules of Procedure [2] is, as with the practice of other international decisional bodies, [3] a well-established and necessary component of the Commission’s processes. [4] Indeed, where such measures are considered essential to preserving the Commission’s very mandate under the OAS Charter, the Commission has ruled that OAS member states are subject to an international legal obligation to comply with a request for such measures. [5]
The mandate given to the Commission by OAS member states,
including the United States, under Article 106 of the Charter of the
Organization of American States and Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the Commission’s
Statute is in turn central to the Commission’s consideration of the matter
presently before it. Through the foregoing provisions, OAS member states have
charged the Commission with supervising member states’ observance of human
rights in the Hemisphere. These rights include those prescribed under the
American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, which constitutes a
source of legal obligation for all OAS member states
[6]
in respect of persons subject to their authority and control.
[7]
The Commission has been directed to pay particular attention to the observance
of Articles I (right to life), II (right to equality before law), III (right to
religious freedom and worship), IV (right to freedom of investigation, opinion,
expression and dissemination), XVIII (right to a fair trial), XXV (right to protection
from arbitrary arrest), and XXVI (right to due process of law) of the American
Declaration.
In addition, while its specific mandate is to secure the observance of international human rights protections in the Hemisphere, this Commission has in the past looked to and applied definitional standards and relevant rules of international humanitarian law in interpreting the American Declaration and other Inter-American human rights instruments in situations of armed conflict. [8]
In taking this approach, the Commission has drawn upon
certain basic principles that inform the interrelationship between
international human rights and humanitarian law. It is well-recognized that
international human rights law applies at all times, in peacetime and in
situations of armed conflict.
[9]
In contrast, international humanitarian law generally does not apply in
peacetime and its principal purpose is to place restraints on the conduct of
warfare in order to limit or contain the damaging effects of hostilities and to
protect the victims of armed conflict, including civilians and combatants who
have laid down their arms or have been placed hors de combat.
[10]
Further, in situations of armed conflict, the protections under
international human rights and humanitarian law may complement and reinforce
one another, sharing as they do a common nucleus of non-derogable rights and a
common purpose of promoting human life and dignity.
[11]
In certain circumstances, however, the test for evaluating the observance of a
particular right, such as the right to liberty, in a situation of armed
conflict may be distinct from that applicable in time of peace. In such
situations, international law, including the jurisprudence of this Commission,
dictates that it may be necessary to deduce the applicable standard by
reference to international humanitarian law as the applicable lex specialis.
[12]
Accordingly, where persons find themselves within the authority and control of a state and where a circumstance of armed conflict may be involved, their fundamental rights may be determined in part by reference to international humanitarian law as well as international human rights law. Where it may be considered that the protections of international humanitarian law do not apply, however, such persons remain the beneficiaries at least of the non-derogable protections under international human rights law. In short, no person under the authority and control of a state, regardless of his or her circumstances, is devoid of legal protection for his or her fundamental and non-derogable human rights.
This basic precept is reflected in the Martens clause common to numerous long-standing humanitarian law treaties, including the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 respecting the laws and customs of war on land, according to which human persons who do not fall within the protection of those treaties or other international agreements remain under the protection of the principles of the law of nations, as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and the dictates of the public conscience. And according to international norms applicable in peacetime and wartime, such as those reflected in Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention and Article XVIII of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, a competent court or tribunal, as opposed to a political authority, must be charged with ensuring respect for the legal status and rights of persons falling under the authority and control of a state.
Specifically with regard to the request for precautionary measures presently before it, the Commission observes that certain pertinent facts concerning the detainees at Guantanamo Bay are well-known and do not appear to be the subject of controversy. These include the fact that the government of the United States considers itself to be at war with an international network of terrorists, [13] that the United States undertook a military operation in Afghanistan beginning in October 2001 in defending this war, [14] and that most of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay were apprehended in connection with this military operation and remain wholly within the authority and control of the United States government. [15]
It is also well-known that doubts exists as to the legal status of the detainees. This includes the question of whether and to what extent the Third Geneva Convention and/or other provisions of international humanitarian law apply to some or all of the detainees and what implications this may have for their international human rights protections. According to official statements from the United States government, its Executive Branch has most recently declined to extend prisoner of war status under the Third Geneva Convention to the detainees, without submitting the issue for determination by a competent tribunal or otherwise ascertaining the rights and protections to which the detainees are entitled under US domestic or international law. [16] To the contrary, the information available suggests that the detainees remain entirely at the unfettered discretion of the United States government. Absent clarification of the legal status of the detainees, the Commission considers that the rights and protections to which they may be entitled under international or domestic law cannot be said to be the subject of effective legal protection by the State.
In light of the foregoing considerations, and without prejudging the possible application of international humanitarian law to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, the Commission considers that precautionary measures are both appropriate and necessary in the present circumstances, in order to ensure that the legal status of each of the detainees is clarified and that they are afforded the legal protections commensurate with the status that they are found to possess, which may in no case fall below the minimum standards of non-derogable rights. On this basis, the Commission hereby requests that the United States take the urgent measures necessary to have the legal status of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay determined by a competent tribunal.