Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Second torture case being brought against Rumsfeld

Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld faces lawsuits over claims he is personally responsible for the alleged torture of US citizens by US forces.

A LAWSUIT accusing former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of personal responsibility for US forces allegedly torturing two American whistleblowers who worked for an Iraqi contracting firm will be allowed to move forward, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday.

The ruling from the 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago comes just days after a similar decision by a federal judge in Washington DC, that gave the green light to an Army veteran — who also alleges he was tortured in Iraq — to sue Rumsfeld for damages.

Monday’s ruling rejected arguments that Rumsfeld should be immune from such lawsuits for work performed as a Cabinet secretary.

The US Supreme Court sets a high bar for those suing a top government official, mandating that they show the acts in question are tied directly to a violation of constitutional rights and that the official clearly understood they were violations.

“There can be no doubt that the deliberate infliction of such treatment on US citizens, even in a war zone, is unconstitutional,” US Circuit Judge David Hamilton wrote in Monday’s opinion.

Allegations

An attorney for Rumsfeld blasted the ruling.

“Having judges second-guess the decisions made by the armed forces halfway around the world is no way to wage a war,” David Rivkin Jr, said in a written statement. “It saps the effectiveness of the military, puts American soldiers at risk, and shackles federal officials who have a constitutional duty to protect America.”

In their lawsuit, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel claim US forces detained them in 2006 after they alleged illegal activities by the Iraqi-owned company they worked for, Shield Group Security.

Among the methods of torture used against them during several weeks in military camps was sleep deprivation and a practice known as “walling,” in which subjects are blindfolded and walked into walls, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleges Rumsfeld personally participated in approving the methods for use by the US military in Iraq, making Rumsfeld responsible, it argues, for what happened to Vance and Ertel.

Their attorney, Mike Kanovitz, welcomed the ruling, saying the court faced a choice between “protecting the most fundamental rights of American citizens in the difficult context of a war or leaving those rights solely in the hands of politicians and the military.”

“It was not an easy choice for the Court to make, but it was the brave and right choice,” Kanovitz said in a written statement.

A spokesman for the US Department of Justice, which represents Rumsfeld in the case, declined comment on the ruling, but Rivkin said he believes the decision will eventually be overturned.

Read: Torture trial against Donald Rumsfeld can proceed >

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
6 Comments
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Unitedpeople Ireland
    Favourite Unitedpeople Ireland
    Report
    Aug 9th 2011, 1:32 PM

    NO living person should be above the law.

    21
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Patrick Sarsfield
    Favourite Patrick Sarsfield
    Report
    Aug 9th 2011, 3:23 PM

    what happens when the law is an ass?

    * It was against the law to have a mixed race marriage in apartheid South Africa
    * It was against the law to listen to Gerry Adams’s voice in Ireland
    * It was against the law to purchase ‘The Tailor and Ansty’ in Ireland
    * It is against the law to have more than one baby in mainland China
    * It is against the law to have a bible in Saudi Arabia

    Natural justice always trumps ‘the law’

    8
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Pilib O Muiregan
    Favourite Pilib O Muiregan
    Report
    Aug 9th 2011, 12:26 PM

    If people have information that could prevent attacks or save lives every form of questioning including torture should be allowed,

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Brian Ward
    Favourite Brian Ward
    Report
    Aug 9th 2011, 12:40 PM

    Does that go for innocent people as well?

    39
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mike
    Favourite Mike
    Report
    Aug 9th 2011, 4:00 PM

    Information acquired using torture is unreliable as people will say anything to make the pain stop. This leads to wild goose chases that waste time and resources.

    15
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Kevin Burke
    Favourite Kevin Burke
    Report
    Aug 10th 2011, 1:56 AM

    Never mind the law it’s morally wrong!..duh

    2
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds