European court backs man in CIA rendition
FILE - In this March 13, 2006 file photo, German Khalid al-Masri who says CIA agents abducted him and transported him to Afghanistan attends a meeting of the European Parliament committee investigating claims of U.S. secret prisons and flights in Europe at the European Parliament, in Strasbourg, eastern France. The European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday, Dec. 13, 2012 in favor of al-Masri who says the CIA illegally kidnapped him and took him to a secret prison in Afghanistan in 2003. The decision was hailed by critics of the so-called extraordinary renditions programs in the U.S. war on terrorism. (AP Photo/Christian Hartmann, File)
Photo by AP
A European court issued a landmark ruling on Thursday that condemned the CIA's extraordinary rendition programs and bolstered those who have claimed they were illegally kidnapped and tortured as part of an overzealous war on terrorism.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled that a German car salesman was a victim of torture and abuse — in a long-awaited victory for a man who had failed for years to get courts in the United States and Europe to recognize him as a victim.
Khaled El-Masri said he was kidnapped from Macedonia in 2003, mistaken for a terrorism suspect, then held for four months and brutally interrogated in an Afghan prison run by the Central Intelligence Agency. He said that once authorities realized he was not a threat, they illegally sent him to Albania and left him on a mountainside.
The European court, based in Strasbourg, France, ruled that El-Masri's account was “established beyond reasonable doubt” and that Macedonia “had been responsible for his torture and ill-treatment both in the country itself and after his transfer to the U.S. authorities in the context of an extra-judicial rendition.”
It said the government of Macedonia violated El-Masri's rights repeatedly and ordered it to pay $78,500 in damages. Macedonia's Justice Ministry said it would enforce the court ruling and pay El-Masri.
Several legal cases are pending from Britain to Hong Kong involving people who said they were illegally detained in the CIA program. Its critics hope that Thursday's ruling will lead to court victories for other rendition victims.
The case focused on Macedonia's role in a single instance of wrongful capture. But it drew broader attention because of how sensitive the CIA extraordinary renditions were for Europe, at a time when the continent was in fear of terrorist attacks but divided over the George W. Bush administration's methods of rooting out terrorism.
Those methods allegedly involved abducting and interrogating terrorist suspects — without court sanction — in the years after 9/11. A 2007 Council of Europe probe accused 14 European governments of permitting the CIA to run detention centers or carry out rendition flights between 2002 and 2005.
The CIA declined to comment on the ruling.
Jim Goldston of the Open Society Institute said that even if the ruling has no effect in the United States, courts in other countries are likely to take it into account.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.