Follow us on social

Gtmo

UN report calls on U.S. government to close Guantanamo Bay

Special rapporteur finds procedures 'establish a structural deprivation and non-fulfilment of rights necessary for a humane and dignified existence’

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

More than twenty years after the prison at Guantanamo Bay opened, the 30 remaining detainees are still subjected to “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment,” according to a new report from the United Nations special rapporteur (SR) on counterterrorism and human rights, Fionnuala Ni Aolain’s report.

The document, which was released to the public on Monday, was the result of a trip to the facility earlier this year — the first of its kind by a UN official since the facility opened in 2002. Its conclusion is clear: the U.S. government should “consider immediate paths to closure” of the detention center. 

Ni Aolain’s visit, which took place in February, included a series of meetings with prisoners’ lawyers and families, as well as former prisoners and some of the then-34 detainees. 

Ni Aolain also spoke with families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks. She “recognizes differing views within the victim community on the legitimacy of the military commissions, the use of the death penalty, and the operation of the Guantánamo detention facility.” But, in her view, the use of torture by the United States now represents the “single most significant barrier to fulfilling victims’ rights to justice and accountability.” 

“[A]ccountability for torture is also accountability to the human rights of victims and survivors,” she writes. 

In her report, Ni Aolain thanked the Biden administration for facilitating her visit but criticized the U.S. government for ongoing violations of international law. “[S]everal U.S. Government procedures establish a structural deprivation and non-fulfilment of rights necessary for a humane and dignified existence and constitute at a minimum, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment across all detention practices at Guantánamo Bay,” she wrote. 

The report focused on detainees’ right to health, access to family, access to justice and fair trial, and the long-term physical and psychological effects of torture. In each case, the special rapporteur found significant reason for concern. 

For example, the special rapporteur “concludes that the foregoing conditions constitute a violation of the right to available, adequate, and acceptable health care—as part of the State’s obligation to guarantee the rights to life, freedom from torture and ill-treatment humane treatment of prisoners, and effective remedy (...) the U.S. Government’s failure to provide torture rehabilitation squarely contravenes its obligations under the Convention against Torture.”

In terms of legal rights, the report found that “the United States has failed to promote and protect fundamental fair trial guarantees and severely impeded the detainees’ access to justice.” One detainee told Ni Aolain that, while some of the material conditions in the prison had improved over time, the legal conditions today are worse than ever. 

The report also looked at the repatriation and resettlement of those who had been released from Guantanamo and found that they had experienced mixed fortunes but that the “vast majority” continued to be victims of human rights abuses. “For many former detainees, their current experience in their home or third country merely becomes an extension of arbitrary detention in Guantánamo, with some even expressing that they wish to return,” wrote Ni Aolain. “The SR spoke with former detainees and families of detainees who upon transfer were forcibly disappeared and arbitrarily detained; enrolled in supposed rehabilitation and reintegration programs but in fact subject to incommunicado detention and torture and ill-treatment,” and more. 

Michèle Taylor, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Council, issued a response to the report, thanking Ni Aolain but disagreeing with many of her report’s findings. “The United States disagrees in significant respects with many factual and legal assertions the SR has made,” Taylor wrote. “Detainees live communally and prepare meals together; receive specialized medical and psychiatric care; are given full access to legal counsel; and communicate regularly with family members.”

Under Biden, so far 10 of the 40 detainees that were there when he took office have left the prison, and 16 others have been cleared for release but remain in Guantanamo.

Advocates, rights groups, and former detainees welcomed the report and called on Biden to fulfill his stated goal of closing the prison, and for the government to provide reparations to prisoners. 

“I was a victim of US torture by the CIA. I survived and have forgiven my torturers, and I am moving on with my life in Belize. But I still wait for an apology, medical care, and other compensation,” said Majid Khan, a former detainee who was released in February 2023. “I appreciate all the support that Belize has provided me, but responsibility lies with the US.”

“It is time to close Guantanamo,” Khan added.

“The Biden administration needs to get out of its own way on Guantanamo closure,” argued Wells Dixon, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights who has served as counsel to several Guantanamo detainees. “It makes no legal or policy sense for the government to continue to fight in court, to detain men it no longer wants to detain, in a prison it has said should be closed, in a war that has ended.”


Detainees in orange jumpsuits sit in a holding area under the watchful eyes of military police during in-processing to the temporary detention facility at Camp X-Ray of Naval Base Guantanamo Bay in this January 11, 2002 file photograph. REUTERS/Stringer/Files
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
American Special Operations
Top image credit: (shutterstock/FabrikaSimf)

American cult: Why our special ops need a reset

Military Industrial Complex

This article is the latest installment in our Quincy Institute/Responsible Statecraft project series highlighting the writing and reporting of U.S. military veterans. Click here for more information.

America’s post-9/11 conflicts have left indelible imprints on our society and our military. In some cases, these changes were so gradual that few noticed the change, except as snapshots in time.

keep readingShow less
Recep Tayyip Erdogan Benjamin Netanyahu
Top photo credit: President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Shutterstock/ Mustafa Kirazli) and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Salty View/Shutterstock)
Is Turkey's big break with Israel for real?

Why Israel is now turning its sights on Turkey

Middle East

As the distribution of power shifts in the region, with Iran losing relative power and Israel and Turkey emerging on top, an intensified rivalry between Tel Aviv and Ankara is not a question of if, but how. It is not a question of whether they choose the rivalry, but how they choose to react to it: through confrontation or peaceful management.

As I describe in Treacherous Alliance, a similar situation emerged after the end of the Cold War: The collapse of the Soviet Union dramatically changed the global distribution of power, and the defeat of Saddam's Iraq in the Persian Gulf War reshuffled the regional geopolitical deck. A nascent bipolar regional structure took shape with Iran and Israel emerging as the two main powers with no effective buffer between them (since Iraq had been defeated). The Israelis acted on this first, inverting the strategy that had guided them for the previous decades: The Doctrine of the Periphery. According to this doctrine, Israel would build alliances with the non-Arab states in its periphery (Iran, Turkey, and Ethiopia) to balance the Arab powers in its vicinity (Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, respectively).

keep readingShow less
Havana, Cuba
Top Image Credit: Havana, Cuba, 2019. (CLWphoto/Shutterstock)

Trump lifted sanctions on Syria. Now do Cuba.

North America

President Trump’s new National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) on Cuba, announced on June 30, reaffirms the policy of sanctions and hostility he articulated at the start of his first term in office. In fact, the new NSPM is almost identical to the old one.

The policy’s stated purpose is to “improve human rights, encourage the rule of law, foster free markets and free enterprise, and promote democracy” by restricting financial flows to the Cuban government. It reaffirms Trump’s support for the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, which explicitly requires regime change — that Cuba become a multiparty democracy with a free market economy (among other conditions) before the U.S. embargo will be lifted.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.