Under US Law Torture is Always Illegal根据美国法律，酷刑，始终是非法的
By通过 Marjorie Cohn马乔里科恩 | What does torture have in common with genocide, slavery, and wars of aggression? | 什么酷刑有一点是共同与种族灭绝，奴隶制，和侵略战争？ They are all jus cogens. Jus cogens is Latin for “higher law” or “compelling law.” This means that no country can ever pass a law that allows torture. 他们都是强制法。强制法是拉丁美洲为“更高的法”或“令人信服的法律” 。这意味着，没有哪个国家能在任何时候都通过一项法律，允许酷刑。 There can be no immunity from criminal liability for violation of a jus cogens prohibition. 不能有任何免于刑事法律责任，因违反强制法禁止。
The United States has always prohibited the use of torture in our Constitution, laws executive statements and judicial decisions. 美国一直禁止使用酷刑在我们的宪法，法律执行报表和司法决定。 We have ratified three treaties that all outlaw torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 我们已经批准了三个条约，所有取缔酷刑和其他残忍，不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚。 When the United States ratifies a treaty, it becomes part of the Supreme Law of the Land under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. 当美国批准一项条约，它就成为部分的最高法律，土地下至上条宪法。
The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, says, “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for torture.” 该公约禁止酷刑和其他残忍，不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚，说： “任何特殊情况，一个国家是否对战争或战争威胁，国内政局动荡或任何其他公共紧急状态，均不得援引为理由酷刑“ 。
Whether someone is a POW or not, he must always be treated humanely; there are no gaps in the Geneva Conventions. 是否有人是一个战俘或没有，他必须始终应予以人道待遇;有没有差距，在日内瓦公约。 He must be protected against torture, mutilation, cruel treatment, and outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating and degrading treatment under, Common Article 3. 他必须受到保护，禁止酷刑，残害，残忍的待遇，和侮辱个人尊严，特别是侮辱性和有辱人格的待遇下，共同第3条。
In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court rejected the Bush administration’s argument that Common Article 3 doesn’t cover the prisoners at Guantánamo. 在哈姆丹诉拉姆斯菲尔德，最高法院拒绝了布什政府的论点，即共同第3条并不包括囚犯在关塔那摩。 Justice Kennedy wrote that 司法坚尼地写道： 
violations of Common Article 3 are war crimes. 违反共同第3条是战争罪行。
We have federal laws that criminalize torture. 我们有联邦的法律，刑事罪论处酷刑。
The War Crimes Act punishes any grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, as well as any violation of Common Article 3. 战争罪行的行为，惩罚的任何严重违反了日内瓦公约，以及任何违反共同第3条。 That includes torture, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and inhuman, humiliating or degrading treatment. 包括酷刑，随意造成重大痛苦或严重伤害其身体或健康，和不人道的，侮辱性的或有辱人格的待遇。
The Torture Statute provides for life in prison, or even the death penalty if the victim dies, for anyone who commits, attempts, or conspires to commit torture outside the United States. 酷刑规约的规定，剥夺政治权利终身，或什至死刑，如果受害人死亡，任何人谁承诺，企图或串谋犯下酷刑美国以外的国家。
The US Army Field Manual’s provisions governing intelligence interrogations prohibit the “use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind.” Brainwashing, mental torture, or any other form of mental coercion, including the use of drugs, are also prohibited. 美国陆军实地手册的规定，情报盘问，禁止“使用武力，精神折磨，威胁，侮辱，或接触到不愉快的和不人道待遇，任何形式的”洗脑，精神折磨，或任何其他形式的精神胁迫，包括使用药物，亦不可。 Military personnel who mistreat prisoners can be prosecuted by court-martial under provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 军事人才，谁虐待囚犯可被检控，由军事法庭的审判下的规定，统一代码的军事司法。 These include conspiracy, cruelty and maltreatment, murder, manslaughter, maiming, sodomy, and assault. 这些措施包括阴谋，残酷和虐待，谋杀，误杀，致残，鸡奸，及殴打。
In Filartiga v. Peña-Irala , the Second Circuit declared the prohibition against torture is universal, obligatory, specific and definable. 在菲拉尔蒂加五peña -伊腊拉 ，第二个电路宣布禁止酷刑是普遍的，强制性的，具体的和明确的。 Since then, every US circuit court has reaffirmed that torture violates universal and customary international law. 自那时以来，每一个美国巡回法院已重申，酷刑违反了普遍和国际习惯法。 In the Paquete Habana , the Supreme Court held that customary international law is part of US law. 在paquete哈瓦那 ，最高法院认为，国际习惯法的一部分，美国法律。
The Constitution gives Congress the power to make the laws and the President the duty to carry them out. 宪法赋予国会的权力，使法律和总统的职责，以贯彻落实。 Yet on February 7, 2002, President Bush, relying on memos by lawyers including John Yoo, announced that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to alleged Taliban and Al Qaeda members. 然而， 2002年2月7日，美国总统布什，依靠备忘录，由律师，包括约翰柳宣布，日内瓦公约并不适用于被指控塔利班和基地组织成员。 Bush said, however, 布什说，不过，
“As a matter of policy, the United States Armed Forces shall continue to treat detainees humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva.” “作为一个政策问题，美国武装部队将继续以人道对待被拘留者，并以适当的范围内并与军事必要性，在一致的方式与原则的日内瓦” 。
But torture is never allowed under our laws. 但酷刑，是决不允许下，我们的法律。
Lawyers in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel wrote memos at the request of high-ranking government officials in order to insulate them from future prosecution for subjecting detainees to torture. 律师在律政司的法律顾问办公室的备忘录写道，在要求政府高级官员在为了隔离他们的未来被检控，被拘留者受到酷刑。 In memos dated August 1, 2002 and March 18, 2003, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo (Jay Bybee, now a federal judge, signed the 2002 memo), advised the Bush administration that the Department of Justice would not enforce the US criminal laws against torture, assault, maiming and stalking, in the detention and interrogation of enemy combatants. 在备忘录日期为2002年8月1日和2003年3月18日，前副助理总检察长约翰柳（杰伊bybee ，现在一名联邦法官， 2002年签署了备忘录） ，建议布什政府表示，该署司法部将不会执行美国刑事法律禁止酷刑，殴打，致残和缠扰，在拘留和审讯的敌方战斗人员。
The federal maiming statute makes it a crime for someone “with the intent to torture, maim, or disfigure” to “cut, bite, or slit the nose, ear or lip, or cut out or disable the tongue, or put out or destroy an eye, or cut off or disable a limb or any member of another person.” It further prohibits individuals from “throwing or pouring upon another person any scalding water, corrosive acid, or caustic substance” with like intent. 联邦致残规约使它成为犯罪有人“意图酷刑，致残，或disfigure ”到“削减，咬，或缝鼻子，耳朵或唇，或剪下或停用舌头，或提出或销毁一只眼睛，或切断或禁用肢体或任何会员另一人“还禁止个人从 ” 投掷或泼后，另一人的任何烫水，腐蚀性酸，碱或物质“与喜欢的意图。
Yoo said in an interview in Esquire that “just because the statute says — that doesn’t mean you have to do it.” In a debate with Notre Dame Professor Doug Cassell, Yoo said there is no treaty that prohibits the President from torturing someone by crushing the testicles of the person’s child. 柳在接受采访时说，在君子“只是因为规约说-这并不意味着你必须这样做。 ”在辩论与巴黎圣母院教授道格卡塞尔，柳说，是没有条约，禁止总统折磨有人由破碎的睾丸该人的儿童。 In Yoo’s view, it depends on the President’s motive, notwithstanding the absolute prohibition against torture in all circumstances. 在柳的看法，这要看总统的动机，尽管绝对禁止酷刑在所有情况下。
The Torture Convention defines torture as the intentional infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering. 酷刑公约的定义的酷刑蓄意造成严重的身体或精神遭受重大痛苦。 The US attached an “understanding” to its ratification of the Torture Convention, which added the requirement that the torturer “specifically” intend to inflict the severe physical or mental pain or suffering. 美国重视的一个“理解”其批准酷刑公约，其中补充的规定，即施刑者“具体”打算造成严重的身体上或精神上的疼痛或痛苦。 This is a distinction without a difference for three reasons. 这是一个区分，没有差异，原因有三。
First, under well-established principles of criminal law, a person specifically intends to cause a result when he either consciously desires that result or when he knows the result is practically certain to follow. 首先，根据既定的刑法原则，一个人特别有意造成的结果时，他要么自觉的欲望所造成的，或是当他知道结果是几乎一定会跟进。
Second, unlike a “reservation” to a treaty provision, an “understanding” cannot change an international legal obligation. 第二，不同的“保留”条约规定， “理解” ，改变不了国际法律义务。
Third, under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, an “understanding” that violates the object and purpose of a treaty is void. 第三，根据维也纳公约关于条约法的， “理解”违反的目的和宗旨的条约是无效的。 The claim that treatment of prisoners which would amount to torture under the Torture Convention does not constitute torture under the US “understanding” violates the object and purpose of the Convention, which is to ensure that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The US “understanding” that adds the specific intent requirement is embodied in the US Torture Statute. 声称囚犯待遇，其中金额将酷刑下，酷刑公约，并不构成酷刑下，美国的“理解”违反的目的和宗旨的公约，这是确保“任何人不得加以酷刑，或施以残忍，不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约“ ，美的”理解“加入具体意图的规定是体现在美国的酷刑规约。
Nevertheless, Yoo twisted the law and redefined torture much more narrowly than the definitions in the Convention Against Torture and the Torture Statute. 不过，柳扭曲了法律和重新界定酷刑更狭义的定义，比在禁止酷刑公约和规约的酷刑。 Under Yoo’s definition, the victim must experience intense pain or suffering equivalent to pain associated with serious physical injury so severe that death, organ failure or permanent damage resulting in loss of significant body functions will likely result. 柳下的定义，受害人必须的经验，激烈的疼痛或痛苦相当于疼痛与身体严重受伤，严重得使患者死亡，器官功能衰竭或造成永久损害，导致重大损失，身体功能，将可能的结果。
Yoo wrote that self-defense or necessity could be used as a defense to war crimes prosecutions for torture, notwithstanding the Torture Convention’s absolute prohibition against torture in all circumstances. 柳中写道自卫的必要性，或可做为防御，以战争罪起诉酷刑，尽管酷刑公约的绝对禁止酷刑在所有情况下。 There can be no justification for torture. 没有任何理由可以为酷刑。
After the exposure of the atrocities at Abu Ghraib and the publication of the August 1, 2002 memo, the Department of Justice knew the memo could not be legally defended. 暴露后的暴行，在阿布格莱布和出版的2002年8月1日的备忘录，律政司知道备忘录，不能在法律上进行辩护。 That memo was withdrawn as of June 1, 2004. 备忘录指出，被撤回，截至2004年6月1日。 A new opinion, authored by Daniel Levin, Acting Assistant Attorney General Office of Legal Counsel, is dated December 30, 2004. 一个新的见解，作者丹尼尔莱文，署理助理总检察长办公室法律顾问，日期是2004年12月30日。 It specifically rejects Yoo’s definition of torture, and admits that a defendant’s motives to protect national security will not shield him from a torture prosecution. 它明确拒绝柳的酷刑的定义，并承认，被告人的动机，以保障国家安全将不会盾牌，他从一个酷刑起诉。 The rescission of the August 2002 memo constitutes an admission by the Justice Department that the legal reasoning in that memo was wrong. 撤销2002年8月备忘录构成一入学，由司法部认为，法律推理在该备忘录是错误的。 But for 22 months, it was in effect, which sanctioned and led to the torture of prisoners in US custody. 但22个月，这是在效果，制裁，并导致酷刑的囚犯在美国关押。
John Yoo admitted the coercive interrogation “policies were part of a common, unifying approach to the war on terrorism.” Yoo and other Department of Justice lawyers, including Jay Bybee, David Addington, William Haynes and Alberto Gonzalez, were part of a common plan to violate US and international laws outlawing torture. 约翰柳承认强制审问“政策的一部分，一个共同的，统一的方法来对恐怖主义的战争。 ”柳和其他律政司的律师，包括杰伊bybee ，戴维阿丁顿，威廉海恩斯和部长冈萨雷斯，被一个组成部分的共同计划违反美国法律和国际法律禁止酷刑。 It was reasonably foreseeable that the advice they gave would result in great physical or mental harm or death to many detainees. 这是合理预见的意见，他们给会导致在重大身体或精神上的伤害或死亡的许多被拘留者。 Indeed, more than 100 have died, many from torture. 事实上，超过100人死亡，许多从酷刑。
ABC News reported last month that the National Security Council Principals Committee consisting of Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, George Tenet, and John Ashcroft met in the White House and micromanaged the torture of terrorism suspects by approving specific torture techniques such as waterboarding. ABC新闻报道，上个月，国家安全会议的校长委员会的切尼，赖斯，拉姆斯菲尔德，国务卿鲍威尔 ， 特尼特，约翰阿什克罗夫特在会见了白宫和micromanaged酷刑的恐怖嫌疑人批准的具体技术，如酷刑作为waterboarding 。 Bush admitted, “Yes, I’m aware our national security team met on this issue. 布什承认， “是的，我知道我们的国家安全团队会面，在这个问题上。 And I approved.” 我和批准“ 。
These top US officials are liable for war crimes under the US War Crimes Act and torture under the Torture Statute. 这些美国高级官员有可能会被战争罪行根据美国战争罪法和酷刑下，酷刑规约。 They ordered the torture that was carried out by the interrogators. 他们下令酷刑，这是所进行的审问。 Under the doctrine of command responsibility, used at Nuremberg and enshrined in the Army Field Manual, commanders, all the way up the chain of command to the commander in chief, can be liable for war crimes if they knew or should have known their subordinates would commit them, and they did nothing to stop or prevent it. 根据学说的指挥责任，用在纽伦堡和体现在军队领域的手册，指挥员，所有的方式成立的指挥链，向指挥官在行政，可以承担战争罪行，如果他们知道或应该知道他们的下属会承诺他们，他们没有制止或防止它。 The Bush officials ordered the torture after seeking legal cover from their lawyers. 布什官员下令酷刑后，寻求法律涵盖从他们的律师。
But Yoo and the other Justice Department lawyers who wrote the enabling memos are also liable for the same offenses. 但柳和其他司法部律师谁写有利的备忘录，也可为同一犯罪行为。 They were an integral part of a criminal conspiracy to violate our criminal laws. 他们是一个不可分割的一个组成部分犯罪阴谋违反了我们的刑事法律。 Yoo admitted in an Esquire interview last month that he knew interrogators would take action based on what he advised. 柳承认，在一个君子采访上个月说，他知道，审讯者会采取行动的基础上，他建议。
The President can no more order the commission of torture than he can order the commission of genocide, or establish a system of slavery, or wage a war of aggression. 总统不能更秩序委员会酷刑比他可以下令该委员会的种族灭绝，或设立一个制度的奴役，或发动战争的侵略。
A Select Committee of Congress should launch an immediate and thorough investigation of the circumstances under which torture was authorized and rationalized. 一个专责委员会，美国国会应该推出立即和彻底的调查，在何种情况下酷刑，被授权和合理化。 The high officials of our government and their lawyers who advised them should be investigated and prosecuted by a Special Prosecutor, independent of the Justice Department, for their crimes. 高级官员，我们的政府和他们的律师，谁忠告，他们应该调查和起诉是由一名特别检察官，独立于司法部，为他们的罪行。
John Yoo, Jay Byee, and David Addington should be subjected to particular scrutiny because of the seriousness of their roles in misusing the rule of law and legal analysis to justify torture and other crimes in flagrant violation of domestic and international law. 约翰柳，杰伊byee ，和大卫阿丁顿都不应受到特别的审议，因为严重性，自己的角色在滥用法治和法律的分析，以证明酷刑和其他罪行，公然违反国内法和国际法。
This essay is adapted from Marjorie Cohn’s testimony before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties 这篇文章是改编自马乔里科恩的证词之前，小组委员会就宪法，公民权利和公民自由
of the House Judiciary Committee . 对众议院司法委员会 。
Marjorie Cohn is president of the National Lawyers Guild and author of 马乔里科恩是主席的全国律师协会和作者 Cowboy Republic 牛仔共和国 . 。
See More: 看到更多的： Torture 酷刑 USA News 美国新闻Have Your Say: Under US Law Torture is Always Illegal 你说：根据美国法律，酷刑，始终是非法的
Please note, only selected comments will be published.请注意，只有选定的评论将出版。
Or discuss this report in our our new forums 或讨论这个报告在我们的我们的新论坛
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 8th, 2008 at 11:39 am and is filed under 此项目被张贴在周四， 2008年5月8日在上午11时39分，并提交下 General 一般 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反应，此项目通过 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 喂养。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回应 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 从你自己的网站。
Free Newsletter 免费通讯 
Related News 相关新闻
- Intelligence chief condemns ‘waterboarding’ as torture情报行政谴责waterboarding '酷刑
- Tasers a form of torture, says UN泰瑟枪一形式的酷刑，说联合国
- CIA ‘Perfects’ Torture Techniques中情局'完善'酷刑技术
- VIDEO: Ben Griffin Speaks Before Being Gagged视频：本格里芬说，前gagged
- Bush’s torture ban is full of loopholes布什的酷刑的禁令是充满漏洞
Email This Page To A Friend 电子邮件此页给朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新闻标题
- Peak Food: Blaming the Victims高峰期的食物：指责受害者
- The Challenge Of Modern Slavery挑战现代奴役
- Ex-MI5 chief warns over detention前军情五处行政警告以上的拘留
- Abuse Claims Mount Against Pentagon, Contractors虐待索赔山对五角大楼，承建商
- Britain throws away £10bn of food every year英国抛弃100亿英镑的食品，每年
- Does Organic Really Mean Organic?是否有机真正的意思有机？
- The New Whopper: Burger with a Side of Spies新whopper ：汉堡与方间谍
- US/IRAQ: Pressure to Cut Costs, Troops Strains “Surge”我们/伊拉克：压力，以降低成本，部队株“风”
- Under US Law Torture is Always Illegal根据美国法律，酷刑，始终是非法的
- Suicide bomber was in Guantánamo, says US自杀炸弹是在关塔纳摩说，美国
More更多 Breaking News突发新闻
Archive 存档