Ashcroft won’t provide documents on torture

WASHINGTON – Angered by the discovery of internal Bush administration memos suggesting torture could be justified in certain instances, Senate Democrats demanded Tuesday that Attorney General John Ashcroft hand over the documents.

During an often-testy Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Ashcroft declined on grounds that his department’s advice to the president is confidential. He insisted, however, that President Bush had not sanctioned the torture of suspected al Qaeda terrorists, Iraqi prisoners or other captives.

“This administration rejects torture,” the attorney general said.

Justice and Defense Department lawyers, in 2002 and 2003 memos disclosed this week by the Wall Street Journal and two other newspapers, said federal laws and decades-old international treaties barring torture could be circumvented by the commander-in-chief for national security imperatives.

Citing the media accounts, committee Democrats pressed the attorney general repeatedly for the documents, which some said chronicle a major policy shift.

The memos “appear to be an effort to redefine torture and narrow the prohibition against it by carving out a class of something called exceptional interrogation,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Ashcroft denied policy had been changed, and declined to provide classified or declassified versions of the memos to the lawmakers.

“I do believe a president has a right to obtain legal advice from his attorney general on matters, and not have to have that revealed to the whole world,” he said.

Democrats challenged the rationale, saying the administration either has to assert an executive privilege claim or cite a law that permits the withholding of the information – neither of which Ashcroft did Tuesday.

“You are not allowed under our Constitution not to answer our questions,” Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., told Ashcroft. “You all better come up with a good rationale, because otherwise it’s contempt of Congress.”

Asked later if the Democrats would press a contempt of Congress case – which would face a high hurdle in the Republican-controlled Senate – the committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, said they would wait to see if the attorney general answers questions they will submit in writing about the administration’s interrogation policies.

The Justice Department advised the White House in an August 2002 memo that international laws against torture such as the Geneva Conventions “may be unconstitutional” if applied to terrorism-related interrogations, The Washington Post reported Tuesday. Similar legal reasoning surfaced in a March 2003 report in which Defense Department lawyers assessed rules being used to interrogate al Qaeda and Taliban suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, the Post said.

Brandishing the now-famous pictures of prisoners being piled naked into a huddle, shackled in uncomfortable positions or confronted by snarling guard dogs, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., drew a direct line between the prison abuse and the legal guidance contained in the administration memos.

“We know, when we have these kinds of orders, what happens,” Kennedy charged. “We get the stress test, we get the use of dogs, we get the forced nakedness that we’ve all seen on these (pictures) and we get the hooding. This is what directly results when you have that kind of memoranda out there.”