New Definitions

A couple of weeks ago, President Bush declared that some of the people he decreed to be the top terrorists who had been captured by the United States were going to be transferred to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He also stated that these top terrorists were going to be put on trial for their actions now that their use in interrogations has been exhausted. The problem is the tribunal process implemented by the White House was overruled by the United States Supreme Court on the grounds that the Congress is the governmental body that needed to implement the tribunal process; the President was not authorized to act as he did. The Court also determined that the Geneva Convention applies to all aspects of the so called "War on Terrorism" including the black ops prisons where these people were held.

The relevance of the later determination is that the secret prisons, which the White House denied existed and accused journalists of treason for having disclosed, engage in torture tactics to acquire information. However, these techniques violate "Common Article Three," which is a general article that is in all of the Geneva Conventions. It prohibits, among other things, "outrages upon personal dignity" and "humiliating and degrading treatment." Bush claims that these are vague and undefined terms that the US Congress needs to define; however, the White House is wrong to make this allegation.

While the terms do not have definitions set forth in the Treaties themselves, there are international tribunals which have interpreted these treaties and these interpretations are internationally recognized. This is the same as the interpretation of vague statutes that Congress drafts. Once the courts interpret statutory language, that becomes binding on all acting under the statute. The Treaties have been interpreted and these interpretations are binding on all governments that are signatories to the Treaties, including the United States. Just like individual states are not allowed to pass laws declaring that they are going to interpret a federal statute different than the federal courts have interpreted it, nations are not allowed to pass laws with different definitions than those which have been established by international tribunals. Thus any interpretation by the White House or the Congress which deviates from the international norm of Common Article Three is a violation of the Treaty.

Violating a treaty is significant. Treaties signed by the United States become the law of the land. The only laws in the United States that are given greater weight than a treaty is the United States Constitution itself. No statute can overrule a treaty and violating a treaty is virtually the same as committing a constitutional violation. Thus, the White House and the Congress are committing violations of the magnitude of a constitutional violation by refusing to follow the Geneva Convention and trying to manipulate the language to meet the White House’s nefarious desires regarding it.

Committing constitutional violations rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors which justify impeachment.