Congressional Record: December 7, 2004 (Senate)
Page S11868-S11869
NOMINATION OF ALBERTO GONZALES TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, soon after we return in January, the Senate
Judiciary Committee will begin consideration of the nomination of
Alberto Gonzales for the position of Attorney General of the United
States. I met with Judge Gonzales on November 17, soon after his
designation as the President's nominee. I had that meeting in
preparation for our hearings. I look forward to working with Senator
Specter and the other members of the Judiciary Committee to assure a
prompt and fair and thorough hearing on this important nomination in
early January.
There is no secret that Judge Gonzales will be called upon to explain
not only his vision of what the role of the Attorney General should be,
but also how he would distinguish it from that of the White House
Counsel. And he is also going to be asked about the role he has played
in formulating the administration's policy on the treatment and
interrogation of prisoners in U.S. custody overseas.
The scandal of Abu Ghraib, allegations of mistreatment in Guantanamo,
investigations and charges from cases in Iraq and Afghanistan are
serious matters. There are lingering questions. There is unresolved
accountability left in their wake.
The Bush administration circled the wagons long ago. It has
continually maintained that the abuses were simply the work of a few
bad apples. But we know that the photos from Abu Ghraib do not depict
an isolated incident. Abuses have occurred in many locations, including
Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, and in a number of other facilities within
Iraq.
I have long said that somewhere in the upper reaches of the executive
branch, a process was set in motion that rolled forward until it
produced this scandal. Even without a truly independent investigation,
we now know the responsibility for abuse runs very high into the chain
of command. Senior officials in the White House, the Justice
Department, and the Pentagon set in motion a systematic effort to
minimize, distort, and even ignore laws, policies, and agreements on
torture and the treatment of prisoners. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and
later LTG Ricardo Sanchez authorized the use of techniques that were
contrary to both U.S. military manuals and international law.
Former CIA Director Tenet requested, and Secretary Rumsfeld approved,
the secret detention of a ghost detainee in Iraq so he could be hidden
from the International Committee of the Red Cross.
These issues, especially when they involve the greatest democracy
history has known, are a significant concern. But there are also issues
in which the administration has been far less than forthcoming. In
letters dated May 17 and June 15 of this year, long before the fall
elections, long before the resignation of John Ashcroft, and long
before he was designated by the President as nominee, I asked Judge
Gonzales to describe his role in both the interpretation of the law and
the development of policies that led to what I and many others
considered to have been a disregard for the rule of law. Those letters
of May 17 and June 15 remain unanswered as of today.
I have repeatedly emphasized to Judge Gonzales the need for
responsiveness and accountability in these matters. Last Friday, I sent
Judge Gonzales a letter reiterating my concerns. I emphasized the
importance of full disclosure during this confirmation process.
I urge him to cooperate, to cooperate now with all members of the
Judiciary Committee on both sides of the aisle on the full range of
issues of oversight and accountability that come before us. That is
something his predecessor did not do. That lack of oversight on the
part of the Senate, the lack of accountability and lack of
responsiveness on the part of the administration, should not continue.
I ask unanimous consent to have my December 3, 2004, letter to Judge
Gonzales printed in the Record.
There being no objection the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, December 3, 2004.
Hon. Alberto R. Gonzales,
Counsel to the President, the White House, Washington, DC.
Dear Judge Gonzales: I enjoyed our preliminary meeting and
look forward to your confirmation hearings. In following up
on our meeting, and to give you and your staff ample
opportunity to prepare for the hearings, I write to reiterate
several concerns that I have raised in prior discussions and
correspondence. When we met on November 17, 2004, I said that
these issues will be raised, by myself and other members of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, during the upcoming hearings.
Based on our conversation, I am encourage by your willingness
to answer questions about you role and your views in these
matters.
Photographs and reports of prisoner abuse in Iraq and other
locations show an interrogation and detention system
operating contrary to U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions. In
addition to the abhorrent images from the Abu Ghraib prison
that were published last spring, actions that have occurred
with Administration approval include the forcible rendition
of individuals to nations where they may face torture, and
the hiding of ``ghost detainees'' from the International
Committee of the Red Cross. Reports of abuse continue to
emerge. Just this week, The New York Times reported that the
Red Cross has charged U.S. military authorities with using
physical and psychological coercion ``tantamount to torture''
on prisoners at Guantamano Bay. The Washington Post is
reporting that in December 2003 Army generals in Iraq were
warned in a confidential report that members of an elite
military and CIA task force were abusing detainees. According
to The Post, the report concluded that certain arrest and
detention practices could be deemed to be ``technically''
illegal.
In letters dated May 17 and June 15 of this year, I asked
you to describe your role in both the interpretation of the
law and the development of policies that led to what I and
many other consider to have been a disregard for the rule of
law. These letters remain unanswered.
My concerns regarding the abuse of prisoners in U.S.
custody did not begin with these letters. I have been seeking
answers from the Administration for well over a year, before
the abuses at Abu Ghraib came to light. In a very few cases
my questions were answered, but with information that later
proved to be less than accurate. For example, in a news
conference on June 22, 2004, you stated, ``In Iraq, it has
always been U.S. position that Geneva applies. From the early
days of the conflict, both the White House and the
Department of Defense have been very public and clear
about that.''
However, an October 24, 2004, article in The Washington
Post revealed yet another Justice Department memo authorizing
actions that potentially violate the Geneva Conventions. The
draft memo, dated March 19, 2004, apparently was written to
authorize the CIA to transfer detainees out of Iraq for
interrogation--a practice expressly prohibited by the Geneva
Conventions. According to the memo's cover letter, it was
drafted at your request.
In another example, a June 25, 2003, letter from Department
of Defense General Counsel William Haynes stated that the
United States was adhering to its international obligations
including those under the Convention Against Torture. We
later learned of an August 1, 2002, Department of Justice
memorandum that twisted the definition of torture in
unrecognizable ways. That memo was addressed to your. We also
learned months
[[Page S11869]]
later of the rendition of a Canadian-Syrian citizen to Syria,
despite his fear of being tortured there, and despite the
Syrian government's well-documented history of torture.
Unnamed CIA officials told the press that this man was in
fact tortured in Syria.
The Committee and the Senate will want to know your role in
these situations and your views with regard to the
development of the legal justifications that appear to
underlie so many of these actions. You will be called upon to
explain in detail your role in developing policies related to
the interrogation and treatment of foreign prisoners. The
American public and the Senate that will be called upon to
confirm your appointment deserve to know how a potential
Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer in the
nation, will interpret and enforce the laws and how you will
develop policy.
We want to know what the current policy on torture is, but
since the Administration disavowed the August 1, 2002, memo,
no public statement of policy has replaced it. Questions
remain unanswered on a host of issues. Requests to the White
House and the Department of Justice for relevant documents--
including my requests to you in May and June of this year--
have been ignored or rejected. I urge you and the
Administration to provide the documents that have been
requested by myself and others without further delay so that
the hearings will be well informed.
Another key concern you will be called upon to discuss is
how you view the duties and responsibilities of the Attorney
General. As we discussed, I view the White House Counsel
position and that of the Attorney General as quite distinct.
You may well have viewed this President as your ``client''
while serving him at the White House, although the courts do
not recognize an attorney-client privilege in that setting.
We will want to know how differently you will act and view
your responsibilities as the Attorney General of the
United States.
Finally, I encourage you to commit to cooperating with all
members of the Judiciary Committee on issues of oversight and
accountability. In the 108th Congress, the Judiciary
Committee failed to fulfill its oversight responsibilities.
Accountability and improving government performance are sound
and long established purposes of congressional oversight, and
accountability has been lacking on these and other crucial
issues. With a new Congress, and a new Attorney General, I
expect a return to the diligent oversight envisioned by our
Founders to ensure that the Executive Branch remains
accountable to the American people.
Our meeting was a constructive beginning at the start of
the confirmation process, and I look forward to your hearing
early next month. In the meantime, Marcelle and I send our
best wishes to you and your family and hope that you have a
restful and rewarding holiday season.
Sincerely,
Patrick Leahy,
Ranking Democratic Member.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I see the distinguished
Senator from North Dakota now seeking the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous unanimous consent, the
Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me ask consent to speak for 20 minutes
in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
