Home > Politics > Political Punch
Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Will Bagram Be President Obama’s Guantanamo?

August 18, 2009 2:05 PM

The White House declined to comment Tuesday about a letter sent by the American Civil Liberties Union asking why President Obama is refusing to make public information about the detainees imprisoned at the US military’s Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt forwarded a reporter to the Pentagon for comment. A spokesman for the Department of Defense told ABC News in a written statement that they responded to the ACLU FOIA request in a letter on July 28, 2009, citing reasons for partially denying the request, due to the need to protect classified information and for reasons of national security. 

"We understand that the ACLU has subsequently appealed this decision on August 13th, but it will take some time for the department to review this and respond appropriately," said the DOD spokesman.  "The nature of war necessitates that some operational details remain classified.  The Department of Defense will continue to be as transparent as possible while keeping in mind that classified information is legally protected from disclosure under FOIA."

In April the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the CIA, Pentagon, State Department, and Justice Department for documents related to the detention and treatment of prisoners at Bagram.

“Bagram prisoners reportedly receive an even less robust and meaningful process for challenging their detention and designation as ‘enemy combatants’ than the process afforded prisoners at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (‘Guantanamo’) - a process the U.S. Supreme Court declared unconstitutional last year,” wrote Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU’s national security project.  Goodman asserted that “there is renewed public concern that Bagram has become, in effect, the new Guantanamo.”

Goodman tells ABC News that the ACLU believes the US government is “detaining upwards of 600 people” at Bagram. “We know nothing about them, we don’t know who they are or how long they’ve been there. They don’t have any access to counsel, or access to courts.”

Thousands of detainees have been imprisoned at Bagram, and two have died there, she notes. Allegations have been made of prisoner abuse and torture.

"Individuals detained at the Bagram Theater Internment Facility (BTIF) are held pursuant to the law of war," the DOD spokesman continued in a written statement.  "There is no question that U.S. and coalition troops are engaged in combat with al Qaida, the Taliban, and associated forces in Afghanistan today, as they have been for the past seven years. The laws and customs of war govern the detention of these enemy combatants who continue to engage in hostilities against U.S. and coalition forces.  Detainees in U.S. military custody are, however, afforded administrative process consistent with the requirements of the laws and customs of war. To that end in Afghanistan, we have instituted a process called the Unlawful Enemy Combatant Review Board (UECRB), pursuant to which detainees are informed of the basis for their detention and afforded the opportunity to present information to, and to appear in person before the Board.  UECRB determinations are based on a preponderance of evidence standard, and final UECRB recommendations are made in closed session by majority vote."

The ACLU sought information about the number of those detained, their names, citizenship, place of capture, length of detention, any information about any legal process afforded those prisoners to challenge their detention, and how they became designated “enemy combatants.”

In a stark contrast to President Obama’s promise of transparency, the Pentagon followed up in a July 28 letter by telling the ACLU that the Obama administration has basic information about the detainees – a 12-page list of individuals held at the Afghan camp as of June 22 -- but is not going to share it.

Goodman said the ACLU found that letter “disappointing and surprising” given the fact that similar information about Guantanamo Detainees has been publicly released by the Pentagon. While the Pentagon was forced to disclose that information because of FOIA litigation, it was ultimately released. The Pentagon’s letter denying the release of information about Bagram detainees ”seems to be the same rationale they lost on.”

The CIA responded to the ACLU by saying it could "neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records.”

Goodman said that response was “ludicrous” given the fact that there’s “plenty of public information that acknowledges the Bagram facility and the government’s role there.”

One of the areas of concern is that Bagram is a place where the US military transfers prisoners captures outside of Afghanistan.

In April, Judge John Bates of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that three such prisoners -- a Tunisian man and two Yemeni men held without charge at Bagram for more than six years -- have the right to have their cases heard in US courts.

Tina Monshipour Foster, executive director of the International Justice Network, which represents the detainees, said that “despite President Obama's rhetoric regarding the closure of Guantanamo, his administration claims the right to use Bagram to imprison people indefinitely and deny them human rights.”

A British human rights group, Reprieve, recently began legal action against the UK governmentto find out more information about two Pakistani men captured in Iraq and rendered to Bagram.

Goodman tells ABC News that this all feels quite similar to the previous administration.
 
“It seems like an unfortunately excessive secrecy redux,” she says. “It’s very important that the Obama administration release this information. Otherwise the public perception of Bagram as another Guantanamo will only continued to fester and grow without some basic transparency.”

-jpt

August 18, 2009 in guantanamo bay, Obama, Barack | Permalink | Share | User Comments (59)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

President Obama is finding that the situation is a little more complicated than he thought. The promises are quite a bit harder to fulfill! This prison camp sounds just as harsh as Guantanamo. Who do people think that we are fighting against? These guys are terrorists. They are not patriots or rebels they are terrorists. I don't know. Of course we should treat all people with respect but until you are in the shoes of those involved in the conflict you should be slow to judge.

The History Man
http://wwwhistoryman.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Charlie Bell | Aug 27, 2009 12:16:49 PM

Can any of folks read.
This article has little to do with the "war" and everything to do with our policy of detaining "enemy combatants" in this case.
This is less troublesome then detaining "enemy non-combatants" with no due process.
THe ACLU is correct for being vigilant in the defense of the Bill of Rights. If the Obama administration believes in this failed policy, now they have to defend it in the light of day.

Finally, the sentence "I think the ACLU has done more harm to our country and they need to be abolished." is simply the dumbest ever constructed.

Posted by: James Scott | Aug 21, 2009 6:08:01 PM

I remember the days when the ACLU stood up for "the little guy". Now, it's anyone who can hurt the United States and everything that is great about our past. The ACLU is nothing more than an organization controlled by the ex-Nazi, George Soros. He did recently empower the mid-west chapter with 20 million dollars. One more thing... being Jewish, the ACLU is embarrassing every time a spokesperson for the organization is Jewish. As a Jew, I'm proud of the country's non-Jewish heritage and principles.

Posted by: Bruce987 | Aug 20, 2009 1:50:51 PM

Lets ask a couple of the ACLU lawyers if they would like to spend a little time with our troops in Afghanistan. The sad part would be that even if they went and saw the horrible truth about the "terrorists" they would still be pursuing their agenda. The agenda being the destruction of our constitution.

Posted by: afloatinasea | Aug 20, 2009 9:00:54 AM

A Code Pink standin for Cindy Sheehan was on a radio talk show and she said that our presence in both Afghanistan and Iraq was causing more terrorism, i.e., there is no "good" war against Al Qaeda. She decried that Sheehan and the "movement" had lost traction even though the wars are generally unpopular but intimated WE will get the message from continued "resistance" on the ground in those countries.

Excuse me, one can be opposed to the wars as not productive or a misuse of our resources. BUT what is going on NOW and most of the past 7 years in Central Asia has not been "insurgents" reclaiming their countries.

Just think for 5 seconds, if America was occupied and you were an "insurgent" ready to take back the country, would you blow up fellow American civilians hundreds at a time, as happened yesterday AGAIN in Baghdad, to make a point, and what point would that be???

Posted by: robertb | Aug 19, 2009 11:58:23 AM

I think the ACLU has done more harm to our country and they need to be abolished.

Posted by: Tim | Aug 19, 2009 8:41:09 AM

"I become increasinly concerned when I read articles such as these. This isn't what I voted for."

There is no policy in this story that Obama didn't make clear 4 months ago.

You've just been giving him a pass until now. Just like you would have if President McCain adopted all of Bush's detention policies and expanded some of them, I'm sure.

Posted by: Dan Q. | Aug 19, 2009 7:38:47 AM

I am sorry, but those like you who voted for CHANGE are receiving nothing but corruption. Obama had many fooled. We can only learn from our mistakes.


Posted by: beechjetwife | Aug 19, 2009 2:58:15 AM
_______________________________________
so what are the rest of you who didn't vote for Obama complaining about? If what you say is true you got exactly what you did vote for, and what we had in 8 years of the Bush Administration. You should all be dancin in the streets!!!

Posted by: dk | Aug 19, 2009 7:05:49 AM

“Remember when Pelosi likened the protestors to Nazis?”

Pelosi actually said, “I think they are AstroTurf — you be the judge, carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care.”

Posted by: Pitt Knicker | Aug 19, 2009 5:57:34 AM

AMERICAN civil liberties union. This group of lawers has no business getting involved in this subject and the Pentagon was correct to answer any questioning by this group in the manner they did. Further the FOIA request should be denied by the courts because it is obvious that NO administration can run a war with lawers telling them haw our military should conduct themselves. There are International organizations a plenty to do this and the ACLU has no place in this matter.

Posted by: pbaz | Aug 19, 2009 5:05:11 AM

I become increasinly concerned when I read articles such as these. This isn't what I voted for.

I am sorry, but those like you who voted for CHANGE are receiving nothing but corruption. Obama had many fooled. We can only learn from our mistakes.

Posted by: beechjetwife | Aug 19, 2009 2:58:15 AM

I become increasinly concerned when I read articles such as these. This isn't what I voted for.

This garbage just strengthens my view that every elected official serving in DC needs to be removed........

Posted by: dk | Aug 19, 2009 2:41:21 AM

Obama is clearly showing his inexperience. People clearly voted for change, however, the change we are receiving is nothing. Our Country is now worse off than it was during the Bush Administration. What happened to "transparency"? Apparently, people were fooled by a charismatic speaker who had nothing to offer but teleprompter.

Posted by: beechjetwife | Aug 19, 2009 1:47:33 AM

==============================
As Obama is transformed from a naive junior senator to a President, he's realizing how right George Bush was.
==============================

Posted by: N Waffff | Aug 19, 2009 12:42:52 AM

deanbob wrote: ""German POWs are just a shade different than terrorists. I believe I remember that a high percentage of German prisoners wanted very much to remain in America."

If high is 0.3%, that is significant. But the vast majority wanted to go home. Additionally, I've met former German POWs and they were not happy with their treatment in the USA, although they never claimed any real abuse.

Posted by: The_Mick | Aug 18, 2009 11:56:16 PM

The CIA responded to the ACLU by saying it could "neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records.”

Above is statement of Criminal International Agency to hide their crimes from Indonesia during Suharto to Iran in 1953.

Posted by: Khondakar Mowla | Aug 18, 2009 11:45:22 PM

But Afghanistan is the "good war".
And Obama is the anti-war president.

Posted by: larry | Aug 18, 2009 10:59:30 PM

Cindy Sheehan is coming after Obama in Martha's Vineyard.

Obama's media will probably ignore it.
Double standard.

Posted by: max | Aug 18, 2009 10:56:02 PM

Bush vindicated.
Now who is the war criminal libs?

Posted by: jack | Aug 18, 2009 10:51:37 PM

What do you expect when you have a community organizer trying to play president.
With zero combat experience, zero military experience, virtualy zero executive experience,the enemy must be shaken in their boots/sandals.
barack paint himself into a corner with some dumb self-rightous decisions and now we are all paying for it.

Posted by: Reality2009 | Aug 18, 2009 10:30:55 PM

Next Comments »

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS