Canadian diplomat Richard Colvin says detainee monitoring program broke down..

There is much clear evidence of cover up given in this testimony. Information was deliberately as a matter of policy kept from people who should have been able to receive the information. Of course there has been a complete stonewalling on this. No doubt it will simply fade into the black hole of forgotten misdeeds and no one will be held accountable. This is from the National Post.

Diplomat says detainee monitoring program broke down

Juliet O’Neill, Canwest News Service





OTTAWA -- A monitoring program aimed at protecting Canadian-transferred detainees from torture by Afghanistan authorities "broke down" not long after it was established in May 2007, diplomat Richard Colvin testified Tuesday at a public hearing by the Military Police Complaints Commission.

Mr. Colvin said very few of the more than 100 detainees captured by the Canadian military and transferred to Afghanistan control were visited by Foreign Affairs officials. And he said the reports of their interviews with detainees, recounting abuse, were circulated to "a handful of carefully selected" senior officials, mostly in Ottawa, who jealously guarded the information.

"The conclusion I came to was this was not a serious effort at monitoring," he said. "Torture continued."

Mr. Colvin, who served in Afghanistan as a diplomat from April 2006 to October 2007, is now deputy head of intelligence at the Canadian Embassy in Washington.

He provoked a political storm last fall when he testified on Parliament Hill that the government and military officials turned a blind eye to the likely torture of detainees transferred to Afghan custody by members of the Canadian Forces.

Mr. Colvin testified that the officer in charge of Canadian military police in Kandahar in 2006 had "explicit instructions" not to provide information about Afghan detainees captured by Canadians to the NATO-led military command.

He recounted how a contact from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force had complained that "getting information from the Canadians is like getting blood out of a stone" and the ISAF official had been told to "mind your own business" when he sought information from Canadians about their captives and transfers.

He said Provost Marshal Maj. Jim Fraser, the officer in charge of military police at the time, told him he would be pleased to share the information but had received explicit instructions from Defence headquarters in Ottawa not to pass on such information.

He also testified that the Canadian Forces were "blocking" the International Committee of the Red Cross from checking detainees transferred to Afghan authorities when he arrived in Afghanistan in 2006.

He brought the problem to the attention of military and other officials, including Maj. Erik Liebert, the deputy commander of Canada's Provincial Reconstruction Team. Liebert was surprised and, after trying to get some guidance, told Mr. Colvin "no one wants to touch this, it's a hot potato."

Terms of Detainee review blasted by Liberals

I do not see why Rae trusts Iacobucci that is unless he is trusting him to carry out a review in secret and help the government avoid accountability. The government wants to avoid a disaster such as happened with the Maher inquiry where much too much about what goes on in government behind the scenes was revealed. You can also trust Iacobucci to charge a fat fee. The parliament surely has the right to see the documents period end of story. The judge is just part of a department of dirty tricks dodge to avoid accountability.

Detainee review terms blasted by Liberals

CBC News
Retired Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci will review whether documents pertaining to the transfer of Afghan detainees can be released to Parliament. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)
Liberal MPs hammered the Tory government over the guidelines a former Supreme Court justice will follow in his review of documents related to the Afghan detainee affair.

During Monday's question period in the House of Commons, Transportation Minister John Baird defended the review's terms of reference, insisting that Frank Iacobucci will have access to all relevant documents.

But foreign affairs critic Bob Rae said while the Liberals trust Iacobucci, they do not trust the government.

"And that's the difference and there’s a big difference. Mr. Iacobucci does not have the power to subpoena the documents."

He also said "the test of relevance is a test that the government itself will apply. It's not Mr. Iacobucci who determines what relevance is."

Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh claimed that the government has hired Iacobucci as "yet another lawyer" who will only be allowed to see what the government wants him to see. He also suggested the government might not allow Iacobucci's report to be made public if the government claims solicitor-client privilege.

Dosanjh also complained that there is no end date for his work to be completed.

"If the government wanted answers it would give Mr. Iacobucci the mandate to conduct a full public inquiry. Or are there horrible secrets that this government is trying to hide?" Dosanjh asked.

But Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the government is providing "all of the documents that are of interest" and will go back to 2001, when Canada began its involvement in Afghanistan.

"Mr. Justice Iacobucci will have a complete authorization to have a look at those and he’ll report those general findings back to the house."

On March 5, Nicholson announced that the government would enlist Iacobucci to review the documents relating to the Afghan detainee affair and whether some could be made public.

On the weekend, the government released Iacobucci's terms of reference, which included which making recommendations as to what information, if disclosed, would compromise national security; deciding whether disclosing information for the purpose of public interest outweighs the purpose of non-disclosure, and whether any information is subject to solicitor-client privilege.

Opposition parties have been trying to get the Conservative government to release the documents pertaining to the handling of Afghan detainees without heavily blacked-out redactions.

The opposition wants to see if government documents contain information about allegations that some Afghan prisoners handed over by Canadian soldiers were tortured by Afghan officials.

The Tories have said some of the documents have remained censored because of national security concerns.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/15/detainee-documents.html#ixzz0iIfxKrx8

Canada wanted Afghan Prisoners Tortured: Legal Expert

Legal expert: Canada Wanted Afghan Prisoners Tortured.

Even before this new accusation was made Harper had prorogued parliament in part because of embarrassing opposition questions about transfer of detainees to Afghan authorities. Now the situation has become far worse. The government will no doubt refuse to do anything on the grounds of national security but to cover its fanny the government will ask a retired Supreme Court Judge Frank Iacobucci to advise it on whether release of documents would be ""injurious". If the lawyer's claims are true it is obvious that the release of the documents would have injurious effects. Some people could be charged with war crimes. Iacobucci is a great choice. He is already known for the Iacobucci inquiry which can be found in summary here.That inquiry was carried out almost entirely in secret and with the three people on whose behalf it was called not able to testify or take part in the investigation of those who were involved indirectly in their incarceration in Syria and Egypt. Even Iacobucci concludes they were tortured. Iacobucci will not doubt collect a very handsome fee for his advice which may not even be made public depending on whether the government likes it or not.Canada wanted Afghan prisoners tortured: lawyer
Unredacted documents show officials hoped to gather intelligence, expert says

CBC News

Federal government documents on Afghan detainees suggest that Canadian officials intended some prisoners to be tortured in order to gather intelligence, according to a legal expert.If the allegation is true, such actions would constitute a war crime, said University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran, who has been digging deep into the issue and told CBC News he has seen uncensored versions of government documents released last year."If these documents were released [in full], what they will show is that Canada partnered deliberately with the torturers in Afghanistan for the interrogation of detainees," he said."There would be a question of rendition and a question of war crimes on the part of certain Canadian officials. That's what's in these documents, and that's why the government is covering up as hard as it can."......Diplomat Richard Colvin says he warned top Canadian officials as early as 2006 that Afghan detainees handed over to Afghans were subsequently being tortured. ....However, Attaran said the full versions of the documents show that Canada went even further in intentionally handing over prisoners to torturers."And it wasn't accidental; it was done for a reason," he said. "It was done so that they could be interrogated using harsher methods."..."High-value targets would be detained under a completely different mechanism that involved special forces and targeted, intelligence-driven operations," Richard Colvin, a former senior diplomat with Canada's mission in Afghanistan, told a parliamentary committee last November.Colvin claimed that all detainees transferred by Canadians to Afghan prisons were likely tortured by Afghan officials. He also said that his concerns were ignored by top government officials and that the government might have tried to cover up the issue..
The Conservatives insist that releasing uncensored files on the issue would damage national security. On Friday, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson asked former Supreme Court of Canada Justice Frank Iacobucci to review whether there would be "injurious" effects if some Afghan detainee documents were made public."Parliament is supreme," said Ontario NDP MP Paul Dewar. "What this is, is a skate around Parliament.""Who knew what and when, and who allowed the continuing saga of Afghan detainees being sent to a potential risk of torture?" Dosanjh said.It's not clear whether the government will make Iacobucci's advice public. Moreover, he is not a sitting judge and can't legally rule or force the government to do anything

from All Voices

National security as a lame excuse!

This is a common strategy. The rights of el Maati, Nureddin, and Al Malki the subjects of the Iacobucci inquiry are similarly denied on the basis of national security. They will never hear the evidence against them and they will not be able to clear their name even though there is an inquiry in their name!
Rick Hillier is just using security as a cop-out. Attaran shows this to be the case by citing US practice. Amazing that in this case Canada is worse than the US. Harper being an admirer of the US should correct Hillier and tell him to imitate the US example!

Afghan detainee information ban infringes rights, says Ottawa professor
Last Updated: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 | 1:37 PM ET
CBC News
The man whose access to information requests first brought the Afghan detainee abuse scandal to light has harshly criticized Canada's top soldier over reports he's muzzling information, saying the alleged ban infringes on the rights of Canadians.

University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran said staff at the department that manages the requests have told him he won't receive the type of information he was granted last year.

"I've been told … that I would just get a whole bunch of blank paper, it would be heavily censored," he said Monday during an interview on CBC Radio's As It Happens.

University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran.
(CBC)
The Globe and Mail reported on Monday that Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier has ordered no documents related to detainees captured in Afghanistan be made public under the Access to Information Act. Hillier, the country's top soldier, said such disclosure could endanger Canadian military operations in Afghanistan, according to the report.

Detainee abuse became a national scandal earlier this year after documents revealed the military was not monitoring detainees who had been transferred from Canadian to Afghan custody. It was later alleged that some of those detainees were being mistreated.

Continue Article

The allegations first came to light after Attaran received the documents through an access to information request.

Attaran says the situation has changed in the past several months.

"We've seen the Department of National Defence and other departments like Foreign Affairs completely clamp down on what documents they're prepared to give to the Canadian public under the Access to Information Act," he said.

Attaran said Hillier and his advisers have ordered no information on Afghan detainees be released, even though decisions on what information is made public is supposed to be made by a civil servant working in each department.

Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier.
(Tom Hanson/Canadian Press)
"The rights of Canadians to access information should be decided by civil servants applying the law," said Attaran. "It's inappropriate for a general and his staff to begin deciding what Canadians may see. That is a foot on the slippery slope of military officers running Canada."

Attaran questioned Hillier's argument that releasing information such as the number of detainees being held would risk soldiers' safety and undermine the mission.

"The number of detainees held by a country is not secret in other nations. The U.S. not only will tell you how many detainees in Guantanamo Bay, they'll give you their names, they'll give you their birthdates," he said.

"Other countries are not so lumbered with secrecy as Canada has become."

Since the beginning of May, the U.S. military has issued 25 media releases detailing the capture of at least 100 Afghan prisoners.

The information is posted on a U.S. army website, with details of the captures, including where they occurred, the number and type of weapons seized, and information about the prisoners, such as rank, and sometimes even names.

Attaran said the alleged information ban in Canada is so extensive that the detainee abuse scandal wouldn't have come to light if it had been in place when he made his earlier request.

"I think the objective is to prevent further scandal," he said.

"That's a law under which any Canadian can insist on receiving certain types of information. It’s a legal right of Canadians and unfortunately that legal right is evaporating at a shocking speed."