Details on the CIA "covert prison system"

This is huge. I will be very curious in the next couple of days to see the recurrence of the debate regarding the legality of the US gulag system in the wake of this new, more complete portrait.

Certainly, some of the practices are locally illegal, in the countries where the suspects are seized, in the countries where they are held, and also, probably, in the US, despite the presidential finding. But as to international law, UN law, and the Geneva Conventions, the only US defense, I see, is the presidential authority to declare these individuals as "enemy combatants," or some other sort of special legal status.

Because, if these individuals are deemed prisoners of war, this is a black letter violation of the Geneva Conventions. Top level, presidentially approved, war crimes. If these individuals are not deemed to be of a legally special status, but instead, just world citizens, I'm quite sure that many laws could be applied coming out of the ICC or Brussels.(Probably why Bush renegged on the previous US commitment to sign onto the ICC.) Most certainly the "Convention Against Torture," to which the US is a signatory, would apply.

And, lastly, and most horribly, if even one of the people who has gone through this system is deemed to have been misidentified and completely innocent of terrorism charges, this is a crime against humanity.

(I know this is a long excerpt. And I know that this is A01 front page of the Washington Post, but several people I know who visit this site don't look at other blogs or visit the WaPo, so I wanted to give them a fair reading of this.)

The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement.....

The existence and locations of the facilities -- referred to as "black sites" in classified White House, CIA, Justice Department and congressional documents -- are known to only a handful of officials in the United States and, usually, only to the president and a few top intelligence officers in each host country.

The CIA and the White House, citing national security concerns and the value of the program, have dissuaded Congress from demanding that the agency answer questions in open testimony about the conditions under which captives are held. Virtually nothing is known about who is kept in the facilities, what interrogation methods are employed with them, or how decisions are made about whether they should be detained or for how long.

While the Defense Department has produced volumes of public reports and testimony about its detention practices and rules after the abuse scandals at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at Guantanamo Bay, the CIA has not even acknowledged the existence of its black sites. To do so, say officials familiar with the program, could open the U.S. government to legal challenges, particularly in foreign courts, and increase the risk of political condemnation at home and abroad. .....

Although the CIA will not acknowledge details of its system, intelligence officials defend the agency's approach, arguing that the successful defense of the country requires that the agency be empowered to hold and interrogate suspected terrorists for as long as necessary and without restrictions imposed by the U.S. legal system or even by the military tribunals established for prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay. .....

It is illegal for the government to hold prisoners in such isolation in secret prisons in the United States, which is why the CIA placed them overseas, according to several former and current intelligence officials and other U.S. government officials. Legal experts and intelligence officials said that the CIA's internment practices also would be considered illegal under the laws of several host countries, where detainees have rights to have a lawyer or to mount a defense against allegations of wrongdoing.

Host countries have signed the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as has the United States. Yet CIA interrogators in the overseas sites are permitted to use the CIA's approved "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques," some of which are prohibited by the U.N. convention and by U.S. military law. They include tactics such as "waterboarding," in which a prisoner is made to believe he or she is drowning. ....

The agency set up prisons under its covert action authority. Under U.S. law, only the president can authorize a covert action, by signing a document called a presidential finding. Findings must not break U.S. law and are reviewed and approved by CIA, Justice Department and White House legal advisers......

Rather, they believe that the CIA general counsel's office acted within the parameters of the Sept. 17 finding. The black-site program was approved by a small circle of White House and Justice Department lawyers and officials, according to several former and current U.S. government and intelligence officials.

And let's remember a week ago.

The proposal, which two sources said Vice President Cheney handed last Thursday to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the company of CIA Director Porter J. Goss, states that the measure barring inhumane treatment shall not apply to counterterrorism operations conducted abroad or to operations conducted by "an element of the United States government" other than the Defense Department.

By the way, after all the foofarah about Judy Miller and the First Amendment, I want to point out that this is a perfect example and use of unnamed sources. This is what a press shield law should protect. I know it's classified information that has been leaked here, but it appears to have been reported in a very responsible way with no details released that would endanger national security. This passes my first amendment test both on the "checks and balance of power" level, and also on the American people's right to know if their government is engaged in illegal activities. So, good job Dana Priest, good job WaPo.

UPDATE: Stephen Hadley had a press confrence today in which he took questions on two interesting topics. The first was on his meeting with Pollari the Sismi Niger forgeries guy, ThinkProgress has the transcript of that here.

Second, he answered questions on this story and torture.

Asked about secret prisons, Hadley said, "The fact that they are secret, assuming there are such sites, does not mean" torture would be tolerated. "Some people say that the test of your principles (is) what you do when no one's looking. And the president has insisted that whether it is in the public or it is in the private, the same principles will apply and the same principles will be respected. And to the extent people do not meet up, measure up to those principles, there will be accountability and responsibility."

Do you believe him?