(Re)interpreting Human Rights: The Case of the “Torture Memos” and their Translation into Italian
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Context and Content
- (1)
- “As we understand it, as a matter of practice, prisoners are presumed to have Article Four POW [Prisoners of War] status until a tribunal determines otherwise. Although these provisions seem to contemplate a case by case determination of an individual’s detainee status, the President could determine categorically that all Taliban prisoners fall outside Article Four. Under Article II of the Constitution, the President possesses the power to interpret treaties on behalf of the Nation.” (Appendix (3), pp. 30–31, italics mine)
- (2)
- “Pursuant to my authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive of the United States, and relying on the opinion of the Department of Justice dated January 22, 2002, and on the legal opinion rendered by the Attorney General in his letter of February 1, 2002, I hereby determine as follows:
- a.
- I accept the legal conclusion of the Department of Justice and determine that none of the provisions of Geneva apply to our conflict with al Qaeda in Afghanistan or elsewhere throughout the world because, among other reasons, al Qaeda is not a High Contracting Party to Geneva.
- […]
- d.
- Based on the facts supplied by the Department of Defense and the recommendations of the Department of Justice, I determine that the Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants and, therefore, do not qualify as prisoners of war under Article 4 of Geneva. I note that, because Geneva does not apply to our conflict with al Qaeda, al Qaeda detainees also do not qualify as prisoners of war”. (Appendix (8), pp. 1–2)
- (3)
- “We conclude that customary international law, whatever its source and content, does not bind the president, or restrict the action of the United States military, because it does not constitute federal law recognized under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution” (Appendix (2), p. 2)
3. Methodological Approach
“how writers/speakers construe for themselves particular authorial identities or personae, with how they align or disalign themselves with actual or potential respondents, and with how they construct for their texts an intended or ideal audience”.([14], p.1)
4. Preliminary Remarks
4.1. Redefinition of Events
- (4)
- “this is a new type of warfare (attitude/appreciation)—one not contemplated in 1949 when the GPW was framed- and requires a new approach (attitude/appreciation) […] the nature of the new war (attitude/appreciation) [on terrorism] places a high premium on…the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities (attitude/judgment). In my judgment, this new paradigm (attitude/appreciation) renders obsolete (attitude/judgment) Geneva’s strict (attitude/judgment) limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders other Geneva provisions quaint (attitude/judgment)” (Appendix (4), pp. 3–4)
- (5)
- “[…] lawyers further believe (engagement/attribute/acknowledge) that this conclusion is appropriate (attitude/judgment) for policy reasons because it emphasizes that the worldwide conflict with al Qaeda is a new sort of conflict(attitude/appreciation), one not covered by GPW or some other traditional rules of warfare. […]” (Appendix (6), p. 3)
- (6)
- “the war against terrorism ushers in a new paradigm (attitude/appreciation), one in which groups with broad international reach commit horrific acts (attitude/judgment/sanction/negative propriety) against innocent civilians (attitude/judgment/sanction/positive propriety)… this new paradigm (attitude/appreciation)—ushered in not by us, but by terrorists requires new thinking (attitude/appreciation) in the law of war […]” (Appendix (8), p. 1)
4.2. Redefinition of Rights and Their Subjects
- (7)
- “armed militants (attitude/judgment/sanction/negative propriety) that oppressed (judgment/sanction) and terrorized (judgment/sanction) the people of Afghanistan” (Appendix (4), p. 3), and
- (8)
- “groups with broad, international reach [who] commit horrific (appreciation/reaction + judgment/sanction/negative propriety) acts against innocent civilians (judgment/sanction/positive propriety) sometimes with the direct support of states.” (Appendix (8), p. 1).
4.3. Redefinition of Actions
- (9)
- “Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function or even death. For purely mental pain or suffering to amount to torture […] it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, e.g., lasting for months or even years”.
5. Evaluating Language and Textual Strategies
- (10)
- “Some commentators argue (engagement/attribute/distance) that these provisions should beread to bar any State party from refusing to enforce their provisions, no matter the conduct of its adversaries… This understanding of the Geneva Conventions cannot be correct (engagement/disclaim/deny)”.
- (11)
- Geneva III contains no strict deadlines for compliance. Indeed, it would be illogical (engagement/entertain + judgment/sanction) to require immediate compliance, particularly if a nation were suddenly attacked […].
- (12)
- “Under the view promoted by many international law academics, (engagement/attribute/force) any presidential violation of customary international law is presumptively unconstitutional. These scholars argue (engagement/attribute/distance) that customary international law is federal law, and that the President’s Article II duty under the Take Care Clause requires him to execute customary international law as well as statutes lawfully enacted under the Constitution. […] This view (graduation/focus/down-scaling) of customary international law is seriously (graduation/force) mistaken (judgment/sanction/veracity). The constitutional text nowhere brackets presidential or federal power within the confines of customary international law.
- (13)
- “We understand (engagement/entertain) that in many years of use on thousands of participants in SERE [40] training the waterboard technique, although (engagement/disclaim/counter) used in substantially more limited way, has not resulted in any cases of serious physical pain or prolonged mental harm. In addition, (graduation) we understand (engagement/entertain) that the waterboard has been used by the CIA on three high level (attitude/judgment) al Qaeda detainees, two of whom were subjected to the technique numerous times, and according to OMS, (engagement/attribute/acknowledge) none (engagement/disclaim/deny) of these three individuals (attitude/implicit-negative appreciation) has shown (engagement/proclaim/endorse) any evidence (graduation/quantity) of physical pain or suffering or mental harm in the more than 25 months since the technique was used on them.”
- (14)
- “OMS identified other potential risks: In our limited experience (engagement/entertain/force), extensive sustained (graduation/force) use of the waterboard can introduce new risks (engagement/entertain entertain). Most seriously, for reasons of physical fatigue or psychological resignation, the subject may simply give up (engagement/entertain entertain), allowing excessive (appreciation/valuation) filling of the airways and loss of consciousness [...].” OMS Guidelines [41] at 18. OMS has also stated (engagement/attribute/acknowledge) that “by days 3–5 of an aggressive (attitude/judgment/capacity) program, cumulative effects (judgment/capacity) become a potential concern (judgment/capacity). Without any hard data to quantify either this risk of the advantages of this technique, we believe (engagement/entertain) that beyond this point continued intense (appreciation + graduation) waterboard applications may not be medically appropriate (engagement/entertain + attitude/judgment).”
6. Memos Translations in Italian
- Memorandum for John Rizzo, regarding the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives (Appendix (10)) [For convenience purposes henceforth named STA (Source Text A). Therefore, the Italian Translation, “Interrogatori di operativi di Al Quaeda”, will be identified as TTA (Target Text A)]
- Memorandum for John Rizzo on the application of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340–2340A to certain techniques (Appendix (13)), henceforth STB. The Italian translation, “Risposta a: Applicazione del titolo 18 Codice penale Usa (USC) USC), articoli 2340-2340A, a determinate tecniche che possono essere usate nell’interrogatorio di detenuti di Al Qaeda di alto livello”, will be TTB.
- Memorandum for John Rizzo on the application of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340–2340A to the combined use of certain techniques (Appendix (14)), henceforth STC. The Italian translation, which has maintained the English subject, will be TTC.
- Memorandum for John Rizzo on the application of United States obligations under Article 16 of CAT (Appendix (15)), henceforth STD. The Italian translation, “Re: Applicazione degli obblighi degli Stati Uniti previsti dall’Articolo 16 della Convenzione contro la tortura (CAT) a determinate tecniche che potrebbero essere state usate durante gli interrogatori a detenuti di alto livello di al Qaeda”, will be TTD.
7. Translation (and) Evaluation
- (15)
- Programma segreto (“Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape”) che aveva come obiettivo primario quello di addestrare i soldati a resistere alla prigionia, qualora fossero caduti in mano nemica e poi rielaborato per renderlo spendibile nella “Guerra al Terrorismo” di Bush. Ne sono stati artefici due psicologi, James Elmer Mitchell e Bruce Jessen, che hanno riadattato gli strumenti della tortura cinese. (TTA, p. 2)(Secret program which had as its primary goal that of training soldiers to resist in captivity if they fell into enemy hands, and then redesigned to be used in Bush’s “War on Terror”. Its authors were two psychologists, James Elmer Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, who adapted the tools of Chinese torture). (Back translation mine)
- (16)
- our previous oral advice (STA, p. 1)il precedente parere verbale di questo ufficio (TTA, p. 1)(the previous oral advice of this office)
- (17)
- Our advice is based upon the following facts, which you have provided to us (STA, p. 1)Il nostro parere si basa sui dati che seguono e che voi avete sottoposto alla nostra attenzione (TTA, p. 1)(Our advice is based on the following data that you have brought to our attention)
- (18)
- against our interests overseas. (STA, p. 1)contro zone di interesse americano oltre oceano (TTA, p. 1)(against American areas of interest overseas)
- (19)
- The duration of confinement varies based upon the size of the container. For the larger confined space, the individual can stand up or sit down; the smaller space is large enough for the subject to sit down (STA, p. 3)La durata del confinamento varia in base alle dimensioni dell’area utilizzata: in spazi √ più ampi l’individuo può stare in piedi o sedersi, in spazi più ristretti √ può soltanto rimanere seduto (TTA, p. 3)(The duration of confinement varies based upon the size of the used area: in larger spaces, the individual can stand up or sit down; in smaller spaces he can only remain sated)
- (20)
- You have asked us to address whether certain, specified interrogation techniques designed to be used on a high value al Qaeda detainee in the War on Terror comply with the federal prohibition on torture, codified at IS U.S.C. (STB, p. 1)Ci avete chiesto di stabilire se certe √ tecniche di interrogatorio pensate per essere usate su detenuti di alto livello di Al Qaeda nella Guerra al Terrore siano in linea con la proibizione √ della tortura, prevista dal titolo 18 dell’ USC... (TTB, p. 1)(You have asked us to establish whether certain interrogation techniques thought to be used on high value al Qaeda detainees in the War on Terror comply with the prohibition on torture laid down in title 18 of the USC)
- (21)
- (We provided a copy of that opinion to you at the time it was issued.) Much of the analysis from our 2004 Legal Standards Opinion is reproduced below; all of it is incorporated by reference herein. (STB, p. 1)√ Molta di quell’analisi è ripresa qui di seguito, e comunque tutto il documento è utilizzato come riferimento. (TTB, p. 1)(Much of that analysis is repeated below and, in any case, the entire document is used as reference)
- (22)
- We base our conclusions on the statutory language enacted by Congress in Sections 23402340A. (STB, p. 3)Basiamo le nostre conclusioni sulle definizioni delle norme √ contenute negli articoli 2340–2340A. (STB, p. 2)(We base our conclusions on the definitions of the rules contained in articles 2340–2340A)
- (23)
- As a practical matter, the detainee’s physical condition must be such that these interventions will not have lasting effect, and his psychological state strong enough that no severe psychological harm will result. (STB, p. 4)In pratica, la condizione fisica del detenuto deve essere tale che questi interventi non possano avere un effetto permanente, e che il suo stato psicologico è abbastanza forte che non ne risulterà alcun √ danno psicologico. (TTB, p. 3)(Practically, the detainee’s physical condition must be such that these interventions cannot 3pl Present Subjunctive + Have a permanent effect, and his psychological state strong enough that no psychological harm will result)
- (24)
- the President has directed unequivocally that the United States is not to engage in torture (STB, p. 2)il presidente ha indicato inequivocabilmente che gli Stati Uniti non ammettono la tortura (TTB, p. 2)(the president has pinpointed unequivocally that the United States do not admit torture)
- (25)
- You have informed us that the initial OMS assessments have ruled out the use of some-or all-of the interrogation techniques as to certain detainees. (STB, p. 5)Ci avete spiegato che i controlli iniziali dell’OMS hanno riguardato alcune o tutte le tecniche di interrogatorio, così come alcuni determinati detenuti. (TTB, p. 3)(You have explained us that the initial OMS assessments have regarded some or all the interrogation techniques as well as certain detainees)
Source Texts | Target Texts | Back Translations |
---|---|---|
(26) Application of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340–2340 to Certain Techniques that may be used in the Interrogation of High Value al Quaeda Detainees (STB, p. 1) | Applicazione del titolo 18 Codice penale USA (USC), articoli 2340–2340, a determinate tecniche che possono essere usate nell’interrogatorio di detenuti di Al Qaeda di alto livello (TTB, p. 1) | Application of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340–2340 to Certain Techniques that POTERE-Present- Indicative 3pl be used in the interrogation of high level al Qaeda detainees |
(27) we addressed the application of the anti-torture statute, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340–2340A, to certain interrogation techniques that the CIA might use in the Questioning (STC, p. 1) | Abbiamo trattato l’applicazione delle norme anti-tortura (Titolo 18, articoli 2340–2340A) ad alcune tecniche di interrogatorio che possono essere impiegate dalla CIA (TTC, p. 1) | we have dealt with the application of the anti-torture provisions (Title 18, articles 2340–2340A) to certain interrogation techniques that POTERE-Present-Indicative 3pl be employed by CIA |
(28) Use of the techniques may be continued if the detainee is still believed to have and to be withholding actionable intelligence (STB, p. 5) | L’uso delle tecniche può essere proseguito se si crede che il detenuto stia nascondendo informazioni importanti (TTB, p. 4) | The use of the techniques POTERE-3pl be continued if it is believed that the detainee is concealing important information |
(29) You have also described how sleep deprivation may be prior and during the waterboard session (STC, p. 9) | Ci avete indicato che la privazione del sonno può essere impiegata prima e durante la sessione del waterboard. (TTC, p. 9) | You have shown us that sleep deprivation POTERE-3sing be employed before and during the waterboard session |
Source Texts | Target Texts | Back Translation |
---|---|---|
(30) You have informed us That your research has revealed that (STA, p. 3) | Ci avete informato del fatto che le vostre ricerche hanno messo in luce (TTA, p. 3) | You have informed us about the fact that your research has brought to light |
(31): With these caveats, we turn to specific examples that you have provided to us. (STD, p. 10) | Con questi presupposti, possiamo passare ad esempi specifici che ci sono stati forniti da voi (TTD, p. 9) | With these assumptions, we can turn to specific examples we have been given by you |
(32) You have orally informed us that this procedure triggers an automatic physiological sensation of drowning (STA, p. 4) | Siamo stati verbalmente informati che questa procedura scatena una sensazione psicologica automatica di annegamento (TTA, p. 4) | We have been verbally informed that this procedure triggers an automatic physiological sensation of drowning |
(33) You have informed us that you have taken various steps to ascertain what effect (STA, p. 4) | Siamo stati informati che sono stati svolti degli accertamenti sugli effetti (TTA, p. 4) | We have been informed that investigations have been carried out on the effects |
(34) You have informed us that diapers are used solely for sanitary and health reasons and not in order to humiliate the detainee. (STD, p. 13) | Siamo stati informati che i pannoloni vengono utilizzati solo per ragioni sanitarie e di salute, e non per umiliare i detenuti. (TTD, p. 12) | We have been informed that diapers are only used for sanitary and health reasons and not to humiliate the detainees. |
(35) You have indicated to us that you have not determined either the order or the precise timing for implementing these procedures (STA, p. 15) | Ci è stato segnalato che l’ordine o la tempistica precisa degli interventi non sono ancora stati decisi. (TTA, p. 14) | It has been reported (to us) that the order or the precise timing of the interventions have not yet been decided. |
(36) you believe that he knows many stories of capture (STA, p. 7) | si presume sia a conoscenza di diversi racconti di catture (TTA, p. 7) | it is assumed he knows several stories of captures |
(37) and you believe it is likely that the two discussed Zawahiri’s experience as a prisoner (STA, p. 7) | e si ritiene che i due abbiano discusso del periodo di prigionia di Zawahiri (TTA, p. 7) | and it is believed the two have discussed Zawahiri’s period of imprisonment |
(38) We also understand that a Medical expert with SERE experience will be present (STA, p. 4) | Ci è poi stato fatto capire che un medico autorizzato del SERE sarà presente (TTA, p. 4) | We have been made to believe that a doctor authorized by SERE will be present |
(39) Moreover, once again we understand that use of this technique will not be accompanied by any specific verbal threat (STA, p. 12) | Inoltre Ѵ ci è dato capire che l’uso di questa tecnica non implica l’uso di minacce verbali (TTA, p. 12) | We are given to understand that the use of this technique does not imply the use of verbal threats |
(40) As we understand it, Zubaydah is one of highest ranking members of the al Qaeda terrorist organization (STA, p. 1) | Da quanto ci dite il sig. Abu Zubayadah sarebbe uno dei membri più importanti dell’organizzazione… (TTA, p 1) | From what you tell us, Mr. Abu Zubayadah would be one of the most important members of… |
8. Conclusions
- (41)
- “The waterboard. In this technique the detainee is lying on a gurney that is inclined at an angle of 10 to 15 degrees to the horizontal, with the detainee on his back and his head toward the lower end of the gurney. A cloth is placed over the detainee’s face and cold water is poured on the cloth from a height of approximately 6 to 18 inches. The wet cloth creates a barrier through which it is difficult—or in some cases not possible—to breathe.” (STB, p. 13)
- Il waterboard. Il detenuto è disteso su una barella inclinata con un angolo di 10–15 gradi. La testa è rivolta verso l’estremità della barella. Gli viene poggiato un panno sul viso e viene versata acqua fredda sul panno da una distanza di circa 15–45 centimetri. Il panno bagnato crea una barriera attraverso la quale è difficile—e in certi casi impossibile—respirare. (TTB, p. 9)
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix
List of the memos used in the analysis |
(1) Date: 25 September 2001 |
To: Tim Flanigan, Deputy Counsel to the President |
From: John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General |
Re: The President’s Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations against Terrorists and Nations Supporting Them |
(2) Date: 9 January 2002 |
To: William J. Hayenes II, General Counsel, Dept. of Defense |
From: John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Robert J. Delahunty, Special Counsel |
Re: Application of Treaties and Laws to al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees |
(3) Date: 22 January 2002 |
To: Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and W. J. Hanes II, General Counsel to the Dept. of Defense |
From: Jay Bybee, Deputy Assistant Attorney General |
Re: Application of Treaties and Laws to al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees |
(4) Date: 25 January 2002 |
To: The President |
From: Alberto Gonzales, Counsel to the President |
Re: Decision Re Application of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War to the conflict with al Qaeda and the Taliban |
(5) Date: 26 January 2002 |
To: Alberto Gonzales, Counsel to the President |
From: Colin Powel, Secretary of State |
Re: Draft Decision Memorandum for the President on the Applicability of the Geneva Convention to the Conflict in Afghanistan |
(6) Date: 2 February 2002 |
To: Alberto Gonzales, Counsel to the President |
From: William Taft, IV |
Re: Comments on Your Paper on the Geneva Convention |
(7) Date: 7 February 2002 |
To: President, Vice President, Secretary of States, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General |
From: Jay Bybee, Deputy Assistant Attorney General |
Re: Human Treatment of al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees |
(8) Date: 7 February 2002 |
To: Vice President, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, Chief of Staff to the President, Director of Central Intelligence, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. |
From: The White House |
Re: Humane Treatment of al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees |
(9) Date: 1 August 2002 |
To: Alberto Gonzales (Counsel to the President) |
From: Jay Bybee (Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Standards of Conduct for Interrogations under 18 U.S.C 2340–2340 |
(10) Date: 1 August 2002 |
To: John Rizzo (Acting General Counsel of the CIA) |
From: Jay Bybee (Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Interrogation of al Qaeda Operative |
(11) Date: 14 March 2003 |
To: William J. Haynes II, General Counsel of the Dept of Defense |
From: John C. Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General |
Re: Military Interrogation of Alien Unlawful Combatants Held outside the United States |
(12) Date: 30 December 2004 |
To: James Comey (Deputy Attorney General) |
From: Daniel Levin (Acting Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Legal Standards Applicable Under 18 U.S.C §§ 2340–2340A |
(13) Date: 10 May 2005 |
To: John Rizzo (Senior Deputy General Counsel of CIA) |
From: Steven G. Bradbury (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Application of 18 U.S.C 2340–2340A to Certain Techniques that may be used in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainee |
(14) Date: 10 May 2005 |
To: John Rizzo (Senior Deputy General Counsel of CIA) |
From: Steven G. Bradbury (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Application of 18 U.S.C 2340–2340A to the Combined Use of Certain Techniques in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainee |
(15) Date: 30 May 2005 |
To: John Rizzo (Senior Deputy General Counsel of CIA) |
From: Steven G. Bradbury (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Application of United States Obligations Under Article 16 of the Convention Against Torture to Certain Techniques that May Be Used in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees |
(16) Date: 31 August 2006 |
To: John Rizzo (Senior Deputy General Counsel of CIA) |
From: Steven G. Bradbury (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) |
Re: Application of the Detainee Treatment Act to Conditions of Confinement at Central Intelligence Agency Detention Facilities |
References and Notes
- Timothy A.O. Endicott. Vagueness in Law. Oxford: O.U.P., 2000. [Google Scholar] The problem of indeterminacy of meaning in the language of legal texts has been widely discussed by theoretical linguists, legal scholars and philosophers of law. Its constitutive elements are usually associated with lexical and syntactic ambiguity (whose disambiguation is context-dependent) and vagueness (of predicates, whose applicability depends on gradient properties, giving rise to borderline cases.
- Timothy Williamson. Vagueness. London: Routledge, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Stewart Shapiro. Vagueness in Context. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Lawrence M. Solan. “Vagueness and Ambiguity in Legal Interpretation.” In Vagueness in Normative Texts. Bern: Peter Lang, 2005, pp. 73–69. [Google Scholar]
- Andrei Marmor. The Language of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Vijay K. Bathia, Jan Engberg, Maurizio Gotti, and Dorothee Heller, eds. Vagueness in Normative Texts. Bern: Peter Lang, 2005.
- Giuseppina Cortese. “Indeterminacy in ‘Rainbow’ Legislation: The Convention on the Rights of the Child.” In Vagueness in Normative Texts. Bern: Peter Lang, 2005, pp. 255–85. [Google Scholar]
- Christiana Ochoa. “Advancing the Language of Human Rights in a Global Economic Order: An Analysis of a Discourse.” Boston College Third World Law Journal 23 (2003): 57–114. [Google Scholar]
- Girolamo Tessuto. “Language and Meaning in the European Discourse of Human Rights.” Textus 17 (2004): 197–216. [Google Scholar]
- Girolamo Tessuto. “Ambiguity and Vagueness in Human Rights Discourse.” In Vagueness in Normative Texts. Bern: Peter Lang, 2005, pp. 287–312. [Google Scholar]
- An in-depth discussion can be found in Jeremy Waldron. “Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment: The Words Themselves.” New York University School of Law, New York, NY, USA, 2008, Public Law Research Paper No. 08-36. Available online: http://srn.com/abstract=1278604 (accessed on 26 June 2014).
- James R. Martin. “Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English.” In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Edited by Susan Hunston and Geoffrey Thompson. Oxford: O.U.P., 2000, pp. 142–75. [Google Scholar]
- Peter White. “Appraisal—The Language of Evaluation and Stance.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics. Edited by Jeff Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2002, pp. 1–27. [Google Scholar]
- James R. Martin, and Peter White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London and New York: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Lucia Abbamonte. Integrated Methodology for Emotion Talk in Socio-legal Exchanges: Politeness, Accommodation and Appraisal Insights. Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Paul Harris, and Buran Wazir. “Briton tells of ordeal in Bush’s torture jail.” The Observer. 29 December 2002. Available online: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/dec/29/terrorism.usa (accessed on 24 April 2014).
- Dana Priest, and Barton Gellman. “Us Decries Abuse, but Defends Interrogations.” Available online: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060901356.html (accessed on 24 April 2014).
- The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Veterans for Peace organization (VFP), the Physicians for Human Rights association (PHR); the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and the Veterans for Common Sense (VCS).
- The Freedom of Information Act, passed in 1966 by President Johnson, gives citizens the right to obtain access to information from the federal government and defines the rules and principles that governmental agencies must follow in order to make that information known. The full procedure is explained on the FOIA website. Available online: http://www.foia.gov/about.html (accessed on 3 May 2012).
- Quoted from the ACLU website. Available online: http://www.aclu.org/accountability/, which provides a full account of the initiatives conducted by the American Civil Liberties Union to obtain the disclosure of the classified material and a list of the released documents.
- A list of the memos taken into consideration in this study is provided in the Appendix. Of course, the number of memos made publicly available since President Obama’s took office in 2009 is much higher. Underlining in the selected extracts will be used to pinpoint elements of analysis. Back translation of the target texts (TTs) is provided in parenthesis.
- For an extensive discussion, see [12,13,14]. A quite comprehensive overview, including recent developments of the intertextual positioning section, is available on P.R.R. White’s Appraisal Website. Available online: http://grammatics.com/appraisal/index.html. For a discussion of the inevitable overlapping of the main subsystems, see [15].
- James S. Holmes. The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Department of General Literary Studies, Translation Studies Section, University of Amsterdam, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- James S. Holmes. Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Theo Hermans, ed. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. New York: St. Martin Press, 1985.
- Theo Hermans. Translation in Systems. Descriptive and System-oriented Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Gideon Toury. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- For an overview of DTS as a multifaceted approach developed by individual scholars in various directions which have differentiated the branch of the discipline from the areas originally delineated by J. S. Holmes in his founding map of the Translation Studies, see Rosa Maria, Bollettieri Bosinelli, and Margherita Ulrych. “The State of the Art in Translation Studies, an Overview.” Textus 12 (1999): 213–19. [Google Scholar]
- The application of the Appraisal Theory in the field of translation studies is quite recent and can count on limited research so far. See, for example, Jeremy Munday. Evaluation in Translation: Critical Points of Translator Decision-making. New York: Routledge, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- An analysis of the rhetorical moves used to transform terrorism in terror and acts of terrorism into acts of war during the Bush administration can be found at different level in many scholars. See, for example, Sandra Silbernstein. War of Words: Language, Politics and 9/11. New York: Routledge, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Richard Jackson. “Language, Policy and the Construction of a Torture Culture in the War on Terrorism.” Review of International Studies 33 (2007): 353–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- George Orwell. “Politics and the English Language.” London: Horizon, 1946, Available online: http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit (accessed on 26 June 2014).
- On the influence of derogatory and taboo terms on the interpretation of the context of use, see Keith Allan, and Kate Burridge. Euphemism and Dysphemism: Language Used as Shield and Weapon. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Miguel Casas Gómez. “Towards a New Approach to the Linguistic Definition of Euphemism.” Language Sciences 31 (2009): 725–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Art 1 of the Convention Against Torture states: “the term ‘torture’ means any act by which severe purposes as pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act […], or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination […]”. Available online: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html (accessed on 26 June 2014).
- In chapter 113 C, 18 USC §2340: U.S. Code-Section 2340 defines torture as an “act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control. Severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering […]”. Available online: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2340 (accessed on 26 June 2014).
- A U.S. Statute which supplies a tort remedy for victims of torture.
- Bybee had become a federal appellate judge in the meanwhile.
- Levin was forced out of the office soon after this memo by the new Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
- U.S. Military training acronym for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape.
- Guidelines on Medical and Psychological Support to Detainee Rendition, Interrogation and Detention, written by the CIA Office of Medical Service (OMS) in 2003 and 2004.
- Goffredo Buccini. “Guantanamo: La legge dei vincitori.” Il Corriere della sera. 22 January 2002. Available online: http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2002/01_Gennaio/22/buccini.shtml (accessed on 24 April 2014).
- Vittorio Zucconi. “Stati Uniti sotto accusa per il campo di Guantanamo.” La Repubblica. 23 January 2002. Available online: http://www.repubblica.it/online/mondo/attaccodiciannove/zucconi/zucconi.html (accessed on 23 April 2014).
- Amnesty International. Abu Ghraib e dintorni: Un anno di denunce inascoltate sulle torture in Iraq. Torino: EGAE (Edizioni Gruppo Abele), 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Alessandra Gianelli, and Maria Pia Paternò, eds. Tortura di Stato: Le ferite della democrazia. Roma: Carrocci, 2004.
- Mario Pasquinelli. Torture "Made in USA": Viaggio nel gulag a stelle e strisce. Bolsena: Massari, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Caterina Mazza. “Tortura oggi: Perché no! Riflettendo su Abu Ghraib e Guantànamo.” Teoria Politica 25 (2009): 121–44. [Google Scholar]
- Daniele Cocco. “Dal Kubrac a Guantanamo: Tecniche che arrivano da lontano.” InStoria. 2009. Available online: http://www.instoria.it/home/kubark_guantanamo_abu_ghraib.htm (accessed on 20 April 2014).
- Amnesty International. “Decimo Anniversario di Guantanamo: cronologia.” Available online: http://www.amnesty.it/decimo-anniversario-guantanamo-cronologia (accessed 24 April 2014).
- Also the 2004 Dossier on torture, published by La Repubblica. “La democrazia nell’età della paura.” and the 2005 online issue of Fondazione Internazionale Lelio Basso. “La tortura oggi nel mondo.” published one year later by EDUP (Edizioni dell’Università Popolare), discuss the topic lengthily with hints and/or explicit references to USA prisoners’ abuses and rendition programs, but do not provide any translation of the documents which have revealed them.
- While the relevant pages on the LSDI website (http://www.lsdi.it/) are no longer available, the site of Giornalismo e Democrazia (http://www.giornalismoedemocrazia.it/) maintains an online section entitled: La tortura in USA? where articles on the topic and the Italian versions of the USA Memos with the names of their translators can still be downloaded. Some untranslated documents, disclosed by Wikileaks, can be found on the site Dark Truth (http://darktruth1.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/wikileaks-ecco-i-documenti-segreti-delle-torture-di-guantanamo/) which has also provided the Italian subtitled version of the CBS 60 Minute Show which in 2005 broadcast the interview to sergeant Eric Saar, author of the book Inside the Wire (New York: Penguin Press, 2005) revealing the cruelties against the prisoners in Guantanamo, and displayed pictures of some of the memos.
- This is what R.K. Newmann says about footnotes in a legal memo (cf. Richard K. Newmann. Legal Reasoning and Legal Writing, 3rd ed. New York: Aspen Publishers, 1998, p. 1). The use of footnotes and lengthy citations in legal memos is the subject of much disagreement among professional writers and legal experts because of the risk of burying important parts of an analysis or of using them to hide uncertainty about the validity of certain allegations. It is the subject of well-known judges’ disputes, published in Court Reviews, and funny newspaper commentaries easily retrievable online.
- See for example Il Corriere della Sera. “Tortura.” Available online: http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2011/maggio/05/TORTURA_co_9_110505006.shtml (accessed on 20 April 2014).
- U.S. military corps websites agree in defining SERE as a set of training activities designed to teach skills and methods of survival and escape from captivity and values expressed in the military code of conduct. Wikipedia also explains it as a program “that provides U.S. military personnel, U.S. Department of Defense civilians, and private military contractors with training in evading capture, survival skills, and the military code of conduct.”
- Maria Tymoczko, and Edwin Gentzler, eds. Translation and Power. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002, vol. xviii.
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Romagnuolo, A. (Re)interpreting Human Rights: The Case of the “Torture Memos” and their Translation into Italian. Humanities 2014, 3, 313-339. https://doi.org/10.3390/h3030313
Romagnuolo A. (Re)interpreting Human Rights: The Case of the “Torture Memos” and their Translation into Italian. Humanities. 2014; 3(3):313-339. https://doi.org/10.3390/h3030313
Chicago/Turabian StyleRomagnuolo, Anna. 2014. "(Re)interpreting Human Rights: The Case of the “Torture Memos” and their Translation into Italian" Humanities 3, no. 3: 313-339. https://doi.org/10.3390/h3030313