Recent HRW Work on the Torture and Abuse of U.S. Detainees

Table of Interrogation Techniques Recommended/Approved by U.S. Officials

(Key to Table at Bottom. Refer to Chronology for Description of Memoranda)

Key to Table

—         No reference to this specific technique.

(2)Use requires permission of the OIC, Interrogation Section.

(3)     Request to use technique must be made through the OIC, Interrogation Section, to the director, Joint Interrogation Group. Extensions beyond initial thirty days must be approved by Commanding General.

(4)       Technique may only be used by submitting request through the director, JIG, for approval by the Commanding General with appropriate legal review and information to Commander, USSOUTHCOM. Technique “required for very small percentage of the most uncooperative detainees (less than 3 percent).” Technique should “be administered by individuals specifically trained in …safe application.”

(5)          Use deemed lawful subject to caveat that “the technique is employed to further an important governmental interest like intelligence gathering, that no severe pain is inflicted, and that it is not done with the intent of causing prolonged mental harm.”

(6)        Use deemed lawful subject to caveat “that technique is not done with specific intent to cause prolonged mental harm and absent medical evidence that it would; notes that caution should be exercised with this method, as foreign courts have already advised about the potential harm this method may cause.

(7)          Use deemed lawful so long as “technique is not done to punish or cause harm but done for legitimate government purpose of obtaining information or maintaining health standards.”

(8)        Use deemed lawful but with recommendation that all techniques in Category II and III be given further legal review prior to their use.

(9)         Use deemed lawful but with note that the technique constitutes an assault under military law.

(10)         Authorized but with caution that “nations that believe that detainees are subject to POW protections might view the use of this technique as inconsistent with Geneva Convention requirements” and urges consideration of such views before application of technique.

(11)        Authorized but with caution that “based on court cases in other countries, other nations may view application of this technique in certain circumstances to be inhumane.  Consideration of these views should be given prior to use of this technique.”

(12)      Authorized but with note that “caution should be applied with this technique because the torture statute specifically mentions making death threats as an example of inflicting mental pain and suffering.”

(13)        Technique recommended but with caveat that it should be subject to the following limitations: that the technique is conducted at strategic interrogation facilities, that there is reason to believe the detainee possesses critical intelligence; that detainee is medically and operationally evaluated as suitable; that interrogators are specifically trained how to administer the technique; that there is a specific interrogation plan (including reasonable safeguards, limits on duration, intervals between applications, termination criteria, and the presence or availability of qualified medical personnel) is developed; that appropriate supervision is provided; and appropriate specified senior level approval is given for use with any specific detainee