The Full Wiki

Detainee Treatment Act of 2005: Wikis

Advertisements

Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.

Encyclopedia

(Redirected to Detainee Treatment Act article)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA) is an Act of the United States Congress that prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay; requires military interrogations to be performed according to the U.S. Army Field Manual for Human Intelligence Collector Operations; and strips federal courts of jurisdiction to consider habeas corpus petitions filed by prisoners in Guantanamo, or other claims asserted by Guantanamo detainees against the U.S. government, as well as limiting appellate review of decisions of the Combatant Status Review Tribunals and Military Commissions.[1] On June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court, in the case of Boumediene v. Bush, ruled 5-4 that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 unconstitutionally limited detainee's access to judicial review and that detainees have the right to challenge their detention in conventional civilian courts.[2]

Contents

Legislative details

The amendment affected the United States Senate Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 (DOD Act); the amendment is commonly referred to as the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977 and also known as the McCain Amendment 1977. It became the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA) as Division A, Title X of the DOD Act.[3] The amendment prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, by confining interrogations to the techniques in FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation. Also, section 1005(e) of the DTA prohibits aliens detained in Guantanamo Bay from applying for a writ of habeas corpus.[4] Certain portions of the amendment were enacted as 42 U.S.C. § 2000dd.

Amendment 1977 amended the Defense Appropriations Bill for 2005 (H.R.2863) passed by the United States House of Representatives. The amendment was introduced to the Senate by Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) on October 3, 2005 as S.Amdt.1977.

The amendment was co-sponsored by Senators Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, Gordon H. Smith, Susan M. Collins, Lamar Alexander, Richard Durbin, Carl Levin, John Warner, Lincoln Chafee, John E. Sununu, and Ken Salazar.

On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment.[5]

The Senators who voted against the amendment were Wayne Allard (R-CO), Christopher Bond (R-MO), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), John Cornyn (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), and Ted Stevens (R-AK).

Signing statement by President Bush

After approving the bill President Bush issued a signing statement: an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law. In it Bush said:[6]

"The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

The Boston Globe quoted an anonymous senior administration official saying, "Of course the president has the obligation to follow this law, (but) he also has the obligation to defend and protect the country as the commander in chief, and he will have to square those two responsibilities in each case. We are not expecting that those two responsibilities will come into conflict, but it's possible that they will".[7]

Criticism

The Act sets the Army's standards of interrogation as the standard for all agencies in the Department of Defense. It further prohibits all other agencies of the U.S. government, such as the CIA, from subjecting any person in their custody to "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment." However, the Act does not provide detailed guidelines that spell out the meaning of that phrase.[8] In an effort to provide clarification, Congress passed legislation in 2008 to similarly constrain the intelligence community to the Field Manual's techniques.[9] McCain voted against this bill and recommended that President Bush follow through on his threat to veto it, arguing that the CIA already could not engage in torture but should have more options than afforded to military interrogators.[10] That bill was passed by both chambers of Congress but, once vetoed, failed to pass with sufficient votes to override the executive veto.[11]

The Detainee Treatment Act cited the U.S. Army's Field Manual on interrogation as the authoritative guide to interrogation techniques, but did not cite a specific edition of the Manual. The contents of the Manual are controlled by the Department of Defense, and thus the executive branch controls whether a given technique will be permitted or banned. The Manual has been revised since the Amendment became law. The Department of Defense has claimed that none of the techniques permitted by the new Field Manual 2-22.3 are classified.[12]

Also, the Detainee Treatment Act's anti-torture provisions were modified by the Graham-Levin Amendment, which was also attached to the $453-billion 2006 Defense Budget Bill. The Graham-Levin Amendment permits the Department of Defense to consider evidence obtained through torture of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and expands the prohibition of habeas corpus for redetainees, which subsequently leaves detainees no legal recourse if they are tortured.[1]

Critics say these two actions deflate the Detainee Treatment Act from having any real power in stopping torture by the United States government, and these were the true reasons why President Bush and McCain "conceded" to Congressional demands. The mainstream media credited their concession to "overwhelming Congressional support" for the measure.[13][14]

Amnesty International claims that the amendment's loopholes actually signal that torture is now official US policy.[15]

Criticisms have also been directed at Senators Lindsey Graham and Jon Kyl for their amicus curiae brief filed in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case, in which they argued that the Detainee Treatment Act's passage sufficed to deny the Supreme Court jurisdiction over the case. Language in the Congressional Record that the majority opinion cites was inserted into the Record for the day on which the amendment passed by Graham and Kyl after the legislation had already been enacted, and furthermore that the language in question was worded in such a manner as to imply it had been recorded in live debate. The revised Record contains such phrasing as Kyl's "Mr. President, I see that we are nearing the end of our allotted time" and Sen. Sam Brownback's "If I might interrupt". Brownback has not responded to press inquiries.[16] Justice Scalia's dissent noted this as an example of Scalia's longstanding hostility to the use of legislative history. Scalia wrote:

Worst of all is the Court’s reliance on the legislative history of the DTA to buttress its implausible reading ... These statements were made when Members of Congress were fully aware that our continuing jurisdiction over this very case was at issue. ... The question was divisive, and floor statements made on both sides were undoubtedly opportunistic and crafted solely for use in the briefs in this very litigation. ... [T]he handful of floor statements that the Court treats as authoritative do not “reflec[t] any general agreement[,]” [t]hey reflect the now-common tactic — which the Court once again rewards — of pursuing through floor-speech ipse dixit what could not be achieved through the constitutionally prescribed method of putting language into a bill that a majority of both Houses vote for and the President signs.

(Emphases in original)

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Malinowski, Tom (December 15, 2005), "Landmark Torture Ban Undercut: Congress Would Allow Evidence Obtained by Torture", quote (Human Rights Watch), http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/12/15/us-landmark-torture-ban-undercut, retrieved April 25, 2009 

    ... President Bush yesterday accepted Senator John McCain’s amendment banning the use of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by U.S. personnel anywhere in the world, and prohibiting U.S. military interrogators from using interrogation techniques not listed in the U.S. Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation

  2. ^ Stout, David (June 13, 2008), Justices Rule Terror Suspects Can Appeal in Civilian Courts, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/washington/12cnd-gitmo.html?&hp=&pagewanted=all, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  3. ^ See Pub.L. 109-148, div. A, tit. X, §§ 1001-1006, 119 Stat. 2680, 2739-44 (2005). Congress also enacted a nearly identical version of the DTA as a component of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, see Pub.L. 109-163, div. A, tit. XIV, §§ 1401-1406, 119 Stat. 3136, 3474-80 (2006) -- an appropriations authorization act that the President signed into law on January 6, 2006 (a week after he signed the original DTA into law). The December 2005 and January 2006 versions of the DTA are generally identical except for certain provisions in the section relating to training of Iraqi security forces (section 1006 of the Dec. '05 DTA and section 1406 of the Jan. '06 DTA). As of 2009, there had been no litigation challenging the validity of either of the DTA statutes on these grounds.
  4. ^ 109th U.S. Congress (2005-12-18), Conference Committee Report 109-359 to accompany H.R. 2863, House of Representatives, http://www.pegc.us/detainee_act_2005.html, retrieved 2008-11-02 

    See n.3. Section 1405(e) of the Jan. '06 DTA purports to make changes to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, the habeas corpus statute, that are nearly identical to those made by section 1005(e) of the Dec. '05 DTA. The current codified version of § 2241 states in a footnote that two subsection (e)s for the section have been enacted.

  5. ^ "U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session". United States Senate. October 5, 2005. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00249. 
  6. ^ Bush, George W. (December 30, 2005). "President's Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863". The White House. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/12/print/20051230-8.html. Retrieved April 25, 2009. 
  7. ^ Savage, Charlie (January 4, 2006), Bush could bypass new torture ban; Waiver right is reserved, The Boston Globe, http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/01/04/bush_could_bypass_new_torture_ban/?page=full, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  8. ^ "Detainee Treatment Act of 2005", Harvard Human Rights Journal 19, Spring 2006, http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss19/suleman.shtml#Heading55, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  9. ^ "U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 2nd Session". United States Senate. February 13, 2008. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00022. 
  10. ^ Quaid, Libby (February 21, 2008) (AP), McCain urges Bush to veto waterboard bill, San Franscico Chronicle, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/21/MNJDV5S7S.DTL&type=printable, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  11. ^ "H.R.2082: Major Congressional Actions", 110th Congress, March 11, 2008
  12. ^ Dept. of Defense (September 06, 2006), Briefing with Deputy Assistant Secretary Stimson and Lt. Gen. Kimmons, The Pentagon, http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=3712, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  13. ^ Henry, Ed (December 15, 2005), McCain, Bush agree on torture ban, CNN.com, http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/15/torture.bill/, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  14. ^ NBC News, AP (December 15, 2005), Bush accepts Sen. McCain’s torture policy, MSNBC.com, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10480690/, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  15. ^ McCoy, Alfred W. (March 2006), Invisible in Plain Sight: CIA Torture Techniques Go Mainstream, Amnesty International Magazine, http://www.amnestyusa.org/amnesty-magazine/amnesty-magazine/page.do?id=1105051, retrieved April 25, 2009 
  16. ^ Bazelon, Emily (March 27, 2006), Invisible Men: Did Lindsey Graham and Jon Kyl mislead the Supreme Court?, Slate.com, http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?id=2138750, retrieved April 25, 2009 

External links

Advertisements

Source material

Up to date as of January 22, 2010

From Wikisource

Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006
Division A—Department of Defense, 2008
Title X—Matters Relating to Detainees
  Note: Public Law 109-163, div. A, title XIV, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3474, enacted identical sections as found below.

TITLE X — MATTERS RELATING TO DETAINEES

Contents

Sec. 1001. Short Title.

This title may be cited as the ``Detainee Treatment Act of 2005´´.

Sec. 1002. Uniform Standards for the Interrogation of Persons Under the Detention of the Department of Defense.

(a) In General.—
No person in the custody or under the effective control of the Department of Defense or under detention in a Department of Defense facility shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by and listed in the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation.
(b) Applicability.—
Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to any person in the custody or under the effective control of the Department of Defense pursuant to a criminal law or immigration law of the United States.
(c) Construction.—
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the rights under the United States Constitution of any person in the custody or under the physical jurisdiction of the United States.

Sec. 1003. Prohibition on Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of Persons Under Custody or Control of the United States Government.

(a) In General.—
No individual in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
(b) Construction.—
Nothing in this section shall be construed to impose any geographical limitation on the applicability of the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment under this section.
(c) Limitation on Supersedure.—
The provisions of this section shall not be superseded, except by a provision of law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act which specifically repeals, modifies, or supersedes the provisions of this section.
(d) Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Defined.—
In this section, the term `cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment´ means the cruel, unusual, and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as defined in the United States Reservations, Declarations and Understandings to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment done at New York, December 10, 1984.

Sec. 1004. Protection of United States Government Personnel Engaged in Authorized Interogations.

(a) Protection of United States Government Personnel.—
In any civil action or criminal prosecution against an officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States Government who is a United States person, arising out of the officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent's engaging in specific operational practices, that involve detention and interrogation of aliens who the President or his designees have determined are believed to be engaged in or associated with international terrorist activity that poses a serious, continuing threat to the United States, its interests, or its allies, and that were officially authorized and determined to be lawful at the time that they were conducted, it shall be a defense that such officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent did not know that the practices were unlawful and a person of ordinary sense and understanding would not know the practices were unlawful. Good faith reliance on advice of counsel should be an important factor, among others, to consider in assessing whether a person of ordinary sense and understanding would have known the practices to be unlawful. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or extinguish any defense or protection otherwise available to any person or entity from suit, civil or criminal liability, or damages, or to provide immunity from prosecution for any criminal offense by the proper authorities.
(b) Counsel.—
The United States Government may provide or employ counsel, and pay counsel fees, court costs, bail, and other expenses incident to the representation of an officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent described in subsection (a), with respect to any civil action or criminal prosecution arising out of practices described in that subsection, under the same conditions, and to the same extent, to which such services and payments are authorized under section 1037 of title 10, United States Code.

Sec. 1005. Procedures for Status Review of Detainees Outside the United States.

(a) Submittal of Procedures for Status Review of Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in Afghanistan and Iraq.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report setting forth—
(A) the procedures of the Combatant Status Review Tribunals and the Administrative Review Boards established by direction of the Secretary of Defense that are in operation at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for determining the status of the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay or to provide an annual review to determine the need to continue to detain an alien who is a detainee; and
(B) the procedures in operation in Afghanistan and Iraq for a determination of the status of aliens detained in the custody or under the physical control of the Department of Defense in those countries.
(2) DESIGNATED CIVILIAN OFFICIAL.—
The procedures submitted to Congress pursuant to paragraph (1)(A) shall ensure that the official of the Department of Defense who is designated by the President or Secretary of Defense to be the final review authority within the Department of Defense with respect to decisions of any such tribunal or board (referred to as the ``Designated Civilian Official´´) shall be a civilian officer of the Department of Defense holding an office to which appointments are required by law to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(3) CONSIDERATION OF NEW EVIDENCE.—
The procedures submitted under paragraph (1)(A) shall provide for periodic review of any new evidence that may become available relating to the enemy combatant status of a detainee.
(b) Consideration of Statements Derived With Coercion.—
(1) ASSESSMENT.—
The procedures submitted to Congress pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) shall ensure that a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or Administrative Review Board, or any similar or successor administrative tribunal or board, in making a determination of status or disposition of any detainee under such procedures, shall, to the extent practicable, assess—
(A) whether any statement derived from or relating to such detainee was obtained as a result of coercion; and
(B) the probative value (if any) of any such statement.
(2) APPLICABILITY.—
Paragraph (1) applies with respect to any proceeding beginning on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Report on Modification of Procedures.—
The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the committees specified in subsection (a)(1) a report on any modification of the procedures submitted under subsection (a). Any such report shall be submitted not later than 60 days before the date on which such modification goes into effect.
(d) Annual Report.—
(1) REPORT REQUIRED.—
The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress an annual report on the annual review process for aliens in the custody of the Department of Defense outside the United States. Each such report shall be submitted in unclassified form, with a classified annex, if necessary. The report shall be submitted not later than December 31 each year.
(2) ELEMENTS OF REPORT.—
Each such report shall include the following with respect to the year covered by the report:
(A) The number of detainees whose status was reviewed.
(B) The procedures used at each location.
(e) Judicial Review of Detention of Enemy Combatants.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider—
``(1) an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; or
``(2) any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention by the Department of Defense of an alien at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who—
``(A) is currently in military custody; or
``(B) has been determined by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.´´.
(2) REVIEW OF DECISIONS OF COMBATANT STATUS REVIEW TRIBUNALS OF PROPRIETY OF DETENTION—
(A) IN GENERAL.—
Subject to subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D), the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of any final decision of a Combatant Status Review Tribunal that an alien is properly detained as an enemy combatant.
(B) LIMITATION ON CLAIMS.—
The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit under this paragraph shall be limited to claims brought by or on behalf of an alien—
(i) who is, at the time a request for review by such court is filed, detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and
(ii) for whom a Combatant Status Review Tribunal has been conducted, pursuant to applicable procedures specified by the Secretary of Defense.
(C) SCOPE OF REVIEW.—
The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on any claims with respect to an alien under this paragraph shall be limited to the consideration of—
(i) whether the status determination of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal with regard to such alien was consistent with the standards and procedures specified by the Secretary of Defense for Combatant Status Review Tribunals (including the requirement that the conclusion of the Tribunal be supported by a preponderance of the evidence and allowing a rebuttable presumption in favor of the Government's evidence); and
(ii) to the extent the Constitution and laws of the United States are applicable, whether the use of such standards and procedures to make the determination is consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(D) TERMINATION ON RELEASE FROM CUSTODY.—
The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit with respect to the claims of an alien under this paragraph shall cease upon the release of such alien from the custody of the Department of Defense.
(3) REVIEW OF FINAL DECISIONS OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—
Subject to subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D), the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of any final decision rendered pursuant to Military Commission Order No. 1, dated August 31, 2005 (or any successor military order).
(B) GRANT OF REVIEW.—
Review under this paragraph—
(i) with respect to a capital case or a case in which the alien was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 10 years or more, shall be as of right; or
(ii) with respect to any other case, shall be at the discretion of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
(C) LIMITATION ON APPEALS.—
The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit under this paragraph shall be limited to an appeal brought by or on behalf of an alien—
(i) who was, at the time of the proceedings pursuant to the military order referred to in subparagraph (A), detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and
(ii) for whom a final decision has been rendered pursuant to such military order.
(D) SCOPE OF REVIEW.—
The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on an appeal of a final decision with respect to an alien under this paragraph shall be limited to the consideration of—
(i) whether the final decision was consistent with the standards and procedures specified in the military order referred to in subparagraph (A); and
(ii) to the extent the Constitution and laws of the United States are applicable, whether the use of such standards and procedures to reach the final decision is consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(4) RESPONDENT.—
The Secretary of Defense shall be the named respondent in any appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit under this subsection.
(f) Construction.—
Nothing in this section shall be construed to confer any constitutional right on an alien detained as an enemy combatant outside the United States.
(g) United States Defined.—
For purposes of this section, the term ``United States´´, when used in a geographic sense, is as defined in section 101(a)(38) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and, in particular, does not include the United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(h) Effective Date.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
This section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) REVIEW OF COMBATANT STATUS TRIBUNAL AND MILITARY COMMISSION DECISIONS.—
Paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (e) shall apply with respect to any claim whose review is governed by one of such paragraphs and that is pending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Sec. 1006. Training of Iraqi Forces Regarding Treatment of Detainees.

(a) Required Policies.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that policies are prescribed regarding procedures for military and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense and contractor personnel of the Department of Defense in Iraq that are intended to ensure that members of the Armed Forces, and all persons acting on behalf of the Armed Forces or within facilities of the Armed Forces, ensure that all personnel of Iraqi military forces who are trained by Department of Defense personnel and contractor personnel of the Department of Defense receive training regarding the international obligations and laws applicable to the humane detention of detainees, including protections afforded under the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture.
(2) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRAINING.—
The Secretary shall ensure that, for all personnel of the Iraqi Security Forces who are provided training referred to in paragraph (1), there is documented acknowledgment of such training having been provided.
(3) DEADLINE FOR POLICIES TO BE PRESCRIBED.—
The policies required by paragraph (1) shall be prescribed not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Army Field Manual.—
(1) TRANSLATION.—
The Secretary of Defense shall provide for the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation to be translated into arabic and any other language the Secretary determines appropriate for use by members of the Iraqi military forces.
(2) DISTRIBUTION.—
The Secretary of Defense shall provide for such manual, as translated, to be provided to each unit of the Iraqi military forces trained by Department of Defense personnel or contractor personnel of the Department of Defense.
(c) Transmittal of Regulations.—
Not less than 30 days after the date on which regulations, policies, and orders are first prescribed under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives copies of such regulations, policies, or orders, together with a report on steps taken to the date of the report to implement this section.
(d) Annual Report.—
Not less than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the implementation of this section.




Advertisements






Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message