There is no evidence to substantiate allegations that members of the army tortured suspects, the government said yesterday as it used its parliamentary majority to block an opposition motion calling for the state to honour its obligations under the UN Convention against Torture and set up an independent investigation.

Although the long-awaited board of inquiry report into allegations made against members of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) was not officially presented, Agriculture Minister Robert Persaud told the house that it found no evidence of torture and that claims by some of the alleged victims were found to be false. He added that it did find cases of “roughing up,” but he explained that in the light of the “new face of criminality” the security forces would use “a certain amount of physical and mental pressure” in order to get information. Such tactics, he insisted, did not fit the definition of torture. “To try to include these acts is to cheapen the definition of torture,” Persaud declared in an impassioned address.

The marathon debate ended around 12:45 am, with the government outvoting the opposition MPs 32 to 18, to defeat the controversial motion after a division was called. By that time, the drowsy assembly was still divided over how to treat the explosive allegations made a year ago against members of the GDF.

Tempers flared throughout. Indignant government speakers maintained that the administration was unreservedly against all forms of torture and refused to support the motion, saying there was no proof to support any allegations. They also insisted that government has been meeting its obligations under the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. But members of the PNCR-1G and the AFC questioned the government’s sincerity, contending that the documented cases of  civilians Patrick Sumner, Victor Jones, David Leander, also known as David Zammett as well as servicemen Michael Dunn, Alvin Wilson and Sharth Robertson, are evidence that rogue operatives in the army have been using torture techniques. The opposition MPs repeatedly accused the government of giving tacit support to the perpetrators, who they claimed have been shielded from any official sanction in exchange for carrying out a campaign to spread fear and intimidation.

The convention defines torture as: any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

Buxtonians Sumner, Jones and Leander were picked up during joint services raids and beaten, and burnt with corrosive substances about their bodies. Leander, who was arrested by police, had to be hoisted into a courtroom to face charges as a result of his condition. GDF soldiers Wilson, Robertson and Dunn, who were interrogated during an investigation into a missing AK-47 meanwhile, said they were choked, maced, whipped with metal pipes and given electrical shocks.

Sad page
The motion, in the name of PNCR-1G MP Aubrey Norton, called on the government to honour its treaty obligations and establish an independent commission to probe the claims against the joint services. It also called for steps to be taken to ensure that the complainants and witnesses are protected against ill-treatment and intimidation — a frequent concern raised during the debate — and that victims be compensated. Additionally, Norton asked for the government to review its detention and interrogation rules to guard against torture, and to ensure that public officials are made aware that all forms of torture are prohibited.

Saying that torture has evolved from numerous excesses by the security forces over the years, Norton told the assembly that it needed to put an end to the insanity. He said the treatment alleged in the six highly publicised cases met all the criteria for torture under the convention and called it a sad page in the country’s history. He charged that the Military Criminal Investigations Department (MCID), accused of torturing suspects during interrogations, has been co-opted into a unit now only answerable to political bosses. He suggested that the government’s ambivalence about the allegations is a sign of its tacit support.

“If the government didn’t approve it, they [members of the joint services] would have been charged and put before the courts,” he said, stressing the need for accountability.

Norton said while the security forces generally prefer to do their work professionally, rogue operatives have been nurtured throughout the years. Arguing the need for a review of the methods of policing and effective crime fighting, he said security forces needed to move away from the image of brute force and ignorance and embrace forensic policing aimed at securing convictions. Urging the house to summon the political will to put an end to extreme methods, he said: “None of us must have to go to bed with the nightmare of the likelihood being tortured by our joint services and they will not torture people if the political system does not condone it.”

‘Rough treatment’
But Persaud, leading a trio of government speakers on the motion, made it clear that the government would not under any circumstances condone torture. He said there has never been any order or directive sanctioning torture by the security forces and insisted that the government has been meeting its duties under the convention.

At the same time, Persaud noted that since the 2002 jailbreak, the security forces have had to contend with a reign of terror that engulfed the population, necessitating firm, decisive and lawful action by the security forces. In this context, he explained that suspects would be interrogated for information. He said that it was inevitable that physical and mental pressure would be applied, but said it did fit the definition of torture. Persaud said not all acts of violence are deemed torture, explaining that while “rough treatment” is deplorable, it does not constitute torture.

He dismissed the motion as irrelevant, riddled with accusations and not taking into consideration the reality of the situation. While the motion called for an independent investigation, he noted that the convention speaks to exhausting all possible efforts and he said alleged victims could seek redress in a number of oversight agencies as well as the courts. “Give us the ocular proof,” he challenged the opposition benches. “You cannot because there is none!”

Excesses
PPP/C MP Gail Teixeira also reported the findings of the board: “They didn’t find anything.” But while she also emphasised that the government would never sanction torture, she admitted that there might be excesses by members of the security forces acting independently. She said: “There may be, from time to time, individual cases, but they are not state sponsored or authorised.” Teixeira accused the opposition of using the allegations for political grandstanding, also pointing out that there are numerous avenues for victims to seek recourse, including the courts. Both Persaud and Teixeira also questioned the PNCR-1G’s “moral authority” in bringing the motion, in the light of its poor human rights record while in office.
AFC MP Raphael Trotman challenged Persaud’s limited definition of torture, citing the International Committee of the Red Cross’s definition, which includes not only physical force. He suggested that the euphemisms and couched language used by the minister are usually employed by those who often are practitioners of illegal methods. Trotman noted that torture and abuse are issues that all governments have to deal with, usually owing to the action of some over exuberant officers. (He added that excesses have been around since before the PPP/C administration, recalling that police have long used illegal methods to coerce suspects and extract confessions.) What is important, he said, is what is done about the allegations. He said he received a first-hand account by a former soldier of being water-boarded and said if the government had nothing to hide it would release the report. “If you are sure that no member of the security force or government was involved you should submit the report for public scrutiny,” he said.

Trotman also challenged Persaud’s assertion that there is no proof of torture being done by the security forces, holding up the bloodstained trousers of prisoner Edwin Niles, who died during interrogation in custody of the prison service. He was burnt with a hot liquid on his back and a post-mortem examination revealed he died of blood clots in his lungs because of the burns on his back. His arm was also fractured. Two prison officers were subsequently charged with his death.

PNCR-1G MPs Keith Scott, Mervyn Williams and Basil Williams also spoke on the motion, as did Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee.