posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 03:28 AM
The major concerns about the USA is that it declines to make torture a crime at Federal levels. There was a Bill introduced (2012) that sought to
criminalise torture, but it wasn't enacted (link
There's also a phrase in the existing anti-torture framework that they don't like, 'prolonged mental harm.' They feel it's too subjective. It's
closer to 'how long is a piece of string?' It represents a 'reservation' that runs counter to International Law against torture.
There's a positive that the US has affirmed it won't continue to use loopholes to effectively torture people via proxy - extraordinary rendition. It
will desist using foreign territories, ships and airplanes under US jurisdiction to torture others. However the statement of intent hasn't been
enacted in Law which means that the historical torture reported in the Press can continue.
On the subject of extraordinary rendition...the report is 'dismayed' that the US failed to provide details of the secret network of prisons and
places where torture has been used. Likewise, in both CIA and military contexts, neither group provided the report with statistics related to
prisoner-abuse, torture, number of prosecutions against US military/CIA staff or the methods of investigation undertaken.
Altogether, it indicates that US policy on torture runs counter to International Law. The failure to be transparent and criminalise torture leaves a
question mark over the extent of the use of torture.