By Cliff Montgomery – Oct. 23rd, 2011
“Real power begins where secrecy begins.”
– Hannah Arendt (The Origin of Totalitarianism, 1951)
The United States and some other nations now possess security services that are little more than an unaccountable “state within a state,” according to a resolution recently passed by the inter-parliamentary Council of Europe.
“In combating terrorism, governments are increasingly invoking ‘state secrecy’ or ‘national security’ in order to ward off parliamentary or judicial scrutiny of their actions,” pointed out the document.
“In some countries, in particular the United States, the notion of state secrecy is used to shield agents of the executive from prosecution for crimes such as abduction and torture, or to stop victims from suing for compensation,” declared the resolution.
“The United States also refused to co-operate, in particular, with the judicial authorities of Germany, Lithuania and Poland in the criminal investigations launched in those countries in view of numerous elements of proof of abductions, secret detentions and illegal transfers of detainees,” the resolution stated.
The bold document was compiled and presented by Dick Marty of Switzerland. On October 6th, 2011, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted the text as its official position on the matter.
“The Parliamentary Assembly considers that judicial and parliamentary scrutiny of government and its agents is of vital importance for the rule of law and democracy. This also applies especially to so-called special services whose activities are usually kept secret. State security and intelligence services…[cannot] become a ‘state within the state’, exempted from accountability for their actions,” declared the resolution.
“Such lack of accountability leads to a dangerous culture of impunity, which undermines the very foundations of democratic institutions,” it added.
“The Assembly recognises the need for states to ensure effective protection of secrets affecting national security. But it considers that information concerning the responsibility of state agents who have committed serious human rights violations, such as murder, enforced disappearance, torture or abduction, does not deserve to be protected as secret.”
“Such information should not be shielded from judicial or parliamentary scrutiny under the guise of ‘state secrecy’. The Assembly believes that there is no reason why judicial and parliamentary institutions should be less trusted than state executive bodies and their agents where the protection of legitimate secrets is concerned,” continued the document.
The resolution offered a prime example of a state crime and the different political responses to it.
Maher Arar is a Canadian citizen who was only ‘guilty’ of being Muslim in America.
In 2002, Arar was traveling back to Canada after visiting relations in Tunisia. While changing planes at JFK airport in New York City, Arar was seized by U.S. officials, quietly shuttled to Syria courtesy of the CIA and ruthlessly tortured.
“Released without charge and allowed to return home to Canada, Maher Arar received an apology and compensation from the Canadian government for its role in his treatment. But the U.S. government has failed to apologize or offer Maher Arar any form of remedy – despite its obligation to do so under the UN Convention Against Torture and other human rights treaties,” points out Amnesty International on its website.
In fact, Arar cannot even argue his case in a U.S. court.
But “as Canada demonstrated in the Maher Arar case, it is possible to put in place special procedures for the supervision of the activities of the special services guaranteeing both the adequate protection of legitimate state secrets and the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms,” stated the Council of Europe resolution.
The resolution further brought countries to task for employing “secret grounds for suspicion.”
“In some circumstances, in particular in the framework of the fight against terrorism, measures restricting freedom and violating fundamental rights are taken against suspected individuals who are not even informed of the – ‘secret’ – grounds for suspicion on which these measures are based and do not have the possibility to seize an independent appeals mechanism,” the document stated.
“The Assembly reiterates its appeal…to reform the ‘blacklisting’ procedures, [thus] putting an end to such arbitrary methods and putting in place mechanisms that are both effective and respectful of the rule of law,” declared the resolution.
