|
The
War Profiteers - War Crimes, Kidnappings & Torture |
|
CIA-Kidnappings: Document 15404/06
(Partially Accessible to the Public) |
|
|
|
Introduction This page lists the correspondence between
representatives of the European Union and the site owner with regards to
public access to redacted parts of document 15404/06 (partially accessible to
the public) of the Council of the European Union. The Council classified
parts of the document and originally refused to grant public access to the
classified parts. |
|
Events in Reversed Chronological Order October
1st, 2008 - Reply to
Confirmatory Application September
16th, 2008 - Request
for Clarification by Applicant July
28th, 2008 - Reply Adopted by
the Council on 24 July 2008 July 4th,
2008 - Confirmatory
Application for Full Public Access July 4th,
2008 - Reply by EU Council to Request
for Clarification June
27th, 2008 - Request
for Clarification by Applicant June
19th, 2008 - Reply by
the General Secretariat of the EU Council June
10th, 2008 - Original Document
Request by Applicant |
|
Related Document November 21st, 2006 - Outcome of the
EU-US Ministerial Troika on Justice and Home Affairs Report by the
Council of the European Union “[…] 2. Terrorism “[…] The Counter-Terrorism (CT) Coordinator reported
on the implementation of all four strands of the counter-terrorism strategy. An
overview of national counter-terrorism mechanisms would be discussed at the
December Council meeting. He mentioned the radicalisation of women and
autonomous radicalisation as particular problems, as well as the problem of
radicalisation in prisons and through the Internet. “Major crises may result in radicalisation. The CT
Coordinator welcomed the plans by USA and EU experts to compare their
findings on radicalisation. Particular attention had been paid to the
protection of borders and infrastructure (air transport and ports). In this
regard private-public cooperation and partnership was particularly important.
He outlined the efforts to bring terrorists to justice, including through
binding legislation at EU level [redacted]*. There were different ways of
cooperating with the USA. “It was important to preserve the balance between
security and liberties. The EP enquiry into secret prisons was mentioned in
this regard. As part of the current work, efforts to improve emergency capabilities,
particularly transport and equipment, were mentioned. These were good reasons
to step up cooperation between the EU and the USA. “The Vice-President of the Commission stated that
many measures (i.e.data retention and practical cooperation) had been
announced a year ago. They had been successfully implemented. He stressed the
importance of the public-private security dialogue and mentioned the recent
conference in Brussels at which detection technologies had been discussed. As
a follow-up, a public-private task force would be set up. The experts were to
submit a comprehensive plan in early 2007. The same topic could be tackled by
the EU/US partnership, particularly on research and protection in the fields
of transport and energy. […] “New approaches “[redacted] The Vice-President of the Commission
pointed out that this was a matter of national responsibility. Decisions
should be taken by the Member States. [redacted] […]” *The extended version of the partially accessible
document contains here the following sentence: “Intelligence cooperation in
the framework of Sitcen was also important.” |
|
Correspondence/History October 1st, 2008 - Reply to Confirmatory Application Dear M. Ottmann, regarding your request for additional information on
document 15404/06 concerning the EU-US Troika meeting held on 6 November
2006, we would like to point out that your application relating to the
document in question has been examined and decided upon by the Council (Ref.
08/c/02/08), pursuant to Regulation 1049/2001 and the Council's Rules of
Procedure. In accordance with the Council's decision, you have been granted
partial access to document 15404/06. We regret to inform you that, by virtue of
Regulation 1049/2001, we are not able to accede to your request for
additional information on that document. As regards your request for other documents
describing the discussions held during the meeting in question, we would like
to inform you that no such documents exist. Yours sincerely, Council of the European Union September 16th, 2008 - Request for Clarification by
Applicant Dear Sirs, I am in receipt of your letter from July 28th, 2008,
i. e. your reply from the Council to my confirmatory application dated July
4th, 2008 and an extended partially accessible version of document 15404/06. In order to decide on how I will proceed further, I
am sending you hereby a request for additional information with regards to
document 15404/06 and the EU-US Troika meeting from November 6th, 2006: 1. The extended partially accessible version of
document 15404 contains one paragraph, which mentions indirectly the CIA
rendition program and the illegal activities of the U.S. government in
Europe: “It was important to preserve the balance between
security and liberties. The EP enquiry into secret prisons was mentioned in
this regard. As part of the current work, efforts to improve emergency
capabilities, particularly transport and equipment, were mentioned. These
were good reasons to step up cooperation between the EU and the USA." With regards to the rest of the document, has the
CIA rendition program or any related activity by either the US or any EU
state been mentioned in any redacted parts, that are currently not accessible
by the public? 2. With regards to the above-cited paragraph of the
document, has the mentioned "efforts to improve emergency capabilities,
particularly transport and equipment," anything to do with the CIA
rendition program or any related EU collaboration? Unfortunately the second
part of the paragraph is formulated in a very vague manner and the
information behind it is very diffuclt to grasp. Could you therefore
elaborate if the CIA rendition program is actually mentioned in this second
part of the paragraph? 3. I understand that Document 15404/06 represents a
summary of the discussions and negotiations of the EU-US Troika Meeting of
November 6th, 2006. In addition to this document, has a protocol been written
or do minutes exist, which describe in a more precise manner, what has been
actually stated by the delegates during that meeting? 4. Besides such a protocol (or minutes), do other
documents exist, which describe the discussions and negotiations at the
Troika meeting of November 6th, 2006? Yours sincerely, Martin Ottmann July 28th, 2008 - Reply Adopted by the Council
on 24 July 2008 Dear Mr. Ottmann, Please find enclosed the reply from the Council to
your confirmatory application dated 4 July 2008 as well as document 15404/06
of which the Council decided to extend the partially accessible version. […] Yours sincerely, Marc Lepoivre Reply Adopted by the Council on 24 July 2008 to
Confirmatory Application 08/c/02/08 The Council has carefully considered the application
under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (OJ L 145 of 31.5.2001, p. 43) and Annex
II to the Council’s Rules of Procedure (Council Decision 2006/683/EC, Euratom
- OJ L 285 of 16.10.2006, p. 47) and has come to the following conclusion: 1. The applicant refers to document 15404/06 which
contains a note from the Council Secretariat containing the Outcome of the
EU-US Ministerial Troika on Justice and Home Affairs held in Washington on 6
November 2006. 2. By letter dated 19 June 2008 the General
Secretariat granted partial access to this document, while withholding
certain parts that contain comments expressed by the representatives of the
United States on the issues discussed during the meeting and/or relate to
cooperation in law enforcement matters and the situation in certain third
countries. Public access to these parts was refused pursuant to Article
4(1)(a), third indent, of the Regulation 1049/2001 (protection of the public
interest with regard to international relations). 3. In an email of 4 July 2008, the applicant
submitted a confirmatory application concerning part 2 of document, entitled
"Terrorism". Whilst referring in his confirmatory application to
Articles 19 and 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
and to recital (2) and Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Regulation 1049/2001, the
applicant essentially claims that any refusal to grant full access to part 2
of the requested document is tantamount to "condoning and supporting secrecy
and covering up possible rights violations”. 4. The Council has thoroughly re-examined the
document concerned and carried out consultations with the department of its
General Secretariat in charge of this matter, and has come to the following
conclusion: 5. Document 15404/06 sets out the outcome of
discussions on questions of EU-US co-operation in the field of transport,
terrorism, illegal immigration and border security as well as organised
crime. This report delivers detailed information on the objectives of both
parties in these areas of common interest and ideas for possible ways forward
regarding those issues. It includes, among others, a state of play on key
matters such as data protection, counterterrorism, visa waiver issues and
trafficking in human beings. 6. The Council considers that, given the sensitive
content of the point 2 of the document, its full release to the public would
undermine the protection of the public interest as regards the EU's
international relations. Disclosure would jeopardise the good functioning of
the EU-US cooperation as such. If the United States had reason to believe
that the positions taken by it on this and other security issues in meetings
not open to the public could be made public unilaterally by the EU side, it
would be difficult, if not impossible, to address controversial issues
between the two sides in this format in the future. This would not only
breach the mutual confidence in the future negotiations but also, in turn,
make it considerably more difficult to find solutions to all the outstanding
issues. Certain positions expressed by the EU side contained in point 2 could
also have a negative impact on relations with certain other third countries. 7. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union has not yet entered into force. The current framework is Article 255 of
the EC Treaty, on which Regulation 1049/2001 - hence also Articles 2, 3 and
4(1)(a) thereof - are based. 8. Full access to point 2 of the document 15404/06
is therefore denied pursuant to Article 4(1)(a), third indent, of the
Regulation (protection of the public interest as regards international
relations). 9. However, the Council has thoroughly re-examined
the content of this passage to check whether it was possible to grant partial
access pursuant to Article 4(6) of the Regulation and decided that, in
addition to those parts of the document that were released following his
initial request, the applicant can inspect one further part which is not
covered by any of the exceptions of the Regulation. July 4th, 2008 - Confirmatory Application for Full
Public Access Dear Sirs, this is a confirmatory application for full public
access/disclosure to/of Part 2 “Terrorism” of document 15404/06, which is
partially redacted. In your reply to my initial application you referred
to Article 4 (1) (a), third indent, of the Regulation 1049/2001 as the basis
for your decision to partially redact the above mentioned document. Under the assumption that the redacted parts of the document
contain information on the U.S. and EU position on the so-called “U.S./CIA
rendition program”, i. e. the illegal kidnapping and detention of individuals
on the territory and airspace of the European Union, I hereby apply for
access/disclosure of part 2 “Terrorism” for the following reasons: Article 42 - “Right of access to documents” - of the
“Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union” (2000/C 36401) states:
“Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having
its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents.” Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European
Parliament and of the Council states: “(2) Openness enables citizens to
participate more closely in the decision-making process and guarantees that
the administration enjoys greater legitimacy and is more effective and more
accountable to the citizen in a democratic system. Openness contributes to
strengthening the principles of democracy and respect for fundamental rights
as laid down in Article 6 of the EU Treaty and in the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union. […]”. Article 2 “Beneficiaries and scope” of the
regulation says: “1. Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal
person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a
right of access to documents of the institutions, subject to the principles,
conditions and limits defined in this Regulation. […] “3. This Regulation shall apply to all documents
held by an institution, that is to say, documents drawn up or received by it
and in its possession, in all areas of activity of the European Union.” With regards to Article 4(1)(a) of the Regulation
1049/2001, I refer to Article 19 (2) of the “Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the European Union” (2000/C 36401): “2. No one may be removed, expelled or
extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be
subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment.” This fundamental right has been repeatedly violated
through the actions of the U.S. government and certain agencies of E.U.
governments, who condoned, supported and/or participated in the criminal
activities of the C.I.A. and the U.S. Department of Defense. People have been
kidnapped, imprisoned and transported to states, where they were likely to be
tortured, such as Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Syria or Afghanistan. Other
individuals, such as the “Algerian Six”, have been imprisoned and transported
to the U.S. concentration camp facility Guantánamo. Additionally, the reports
of the EC and EU committees on the CIA kidnappings came to the conclusion
that secret prisons most likely exist or existed in Poland and Romania. In this context, and after the disregard and failure
of the European Union and its members states to enforce above-mentioned
Article 19 in order to prevent the C.I.A. kidnappings, but having instead
cooperated in criminal activities themselves, it is absolutely mandatory that
any EU documents on this subject are made available for public scrutiny, so
as to make public further intent to commit or condone violations or the of
the Article 19, by the U.S. and certain EU member states. Article (1)(a)
becomes void, as by refusing to provide the public with complete
transparency, you are actually not serving the public interest in public
security, but instead you are condoning and supporting secrecy and covering
up possible human rights violations. Thereby you are serving the interests of
the current U.S. administration, instead of the interests of EU citizens.
Likewise you are covering up possible criminal activities and criminal intent
of certain agencies within the governments of certain EU countries. I hereby permit the Council to make this
confirmatory application fully public in the Council’s Register of documents. Sincerely yours, Martin Ottmann July 4th, 2008 - Reply by EU Council to Request for
Clarification Dear Mr Ottmann, thank you for your e-mail regarding your request for
further information on the deleted parts of the document 15404/06. The General Secretariat of the Council has
considered your requests and we would like to inform you that as the deleted
parts have been deemed to be covered by the exception relating to the
protection of international relations (Article 4 (1) (a), third indent, of
the Regulation 1049/2001), it is not possible to provide you more information
as to why these parts cannot be disclosed without revealing their contents. If you contest the General Secretariat's initial
reply, you may do so by lodging in a confirmatory application, which will be
examined according to the procedures established within the General
Secretariat of the Council and to which the Council will reply in due course. Yours sincerely, For the General Secretariat of the Council Cornelis Boer June 27th, 2008 - Request for Clarification by
Applicant Dear Sirs, thank you for your e-mail, the attached letter by
the General Secretariat from June 19th, 2008. With regards to further disclosure of the redacted
parts of document 15404/06 you stated in your letter "Under Article 7(2)
of the Regulation, you have 15 working days to submit a confirmatory
application asking the Council to review its position." Nevertheless, in order to submit a confirmatory
application, I need to have certain information beforehand with regards to
your position to redact contents of the document pursuant to Article 4(1)(a)
of the Regulation 1049/2001 and with regards to certain information about the
redacted contents of the document. I therefore ask you to extend the delay of 15
working days to send you the confirmatory application, until you have
provided me with a reply to this e-mail and my supplemental questions. Supplemental questions: 1) With regards to section titled "2.
Terrorism", does this section mention the CIA's rendition program, the
illegal kidnapping and imprisonment by US authorities in Europe? 2) With regards to your decision to redact portions
of section "2. Terrorism", please state more precisely why the
disclosure of the redacted portions "would prejudice relations between
the European Union, the United States and third countries." Please also state why the disclosure of comments
made by the EU CT Coordinator would pejudice relations between the EU and the
US. Sincerely yours, Martin Ottmann June 19th, 2008 - Reply by the General
Secretariat of the EU Council Dear Mr Ottmann, By e-mail of 10 June 2008 you requested access to
document 15404/06. The General Secretariat of the Council has examined
your request on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European
Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament,
Council and Commission documents (Official Journal L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43)
and the specific provisions concerning public access to Council documents set
out in Annex II to the Council's Rules of Procedure (Council Decision No
2006/683/EC, Euratom, Official Journal L 285, 16 October 2006, p. 47). After its examination, the General Secretariat has
come to the following conclusion: Document 15404/06 is a note from the Council
Secretariat containing the Outcome of the EU-US Ministerial Troika on Justice
and Home Affairs held in Washington on 6 November 2006. You may have access to this document with the
exception of those parts which contain comments expressed by the
representatives of the United States on the issues discussed during the meeting
and with the exception of those parts which relate to cooperation in law
enforcement matters and the situation in certain third countries. Disclosure of such information could, on one hand, prejudice
relations between the European Union, the United States and the third
countries concerned and, on the other, weaken the position of the European
Union in future negotiations with these countries. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 4(1)(a), third indent,
of the Regulation 1049/2001 (protection of the public interest with regard to
international relations), the General Secretariat is unable to grant you
access to these parts of the document. Under Article 7(2) of the Regulation, you have 15
working days to submit a confirmatory application asking the Council to
review its position. Yours sincerely, For the General Secretariat Ramón Jiménez Fraile June 10th, 2008 - Original Document Request by Applicant Request
sent via weblink through the web site of the European Council. No text is
available. |
|
|
|
Back
to CIA kidnappings in Europe |