AMY GOODMAN: As the search for Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar intensifies in Afghanistan, so have U.S. efforts to capture and question suspected Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters. Over the last two days alone, at least 30 new prisoners have been brought to detention centers in Afghanistan, where they’re being probed for information on the whereabouts of the missing leaders. These additions bring the total number of prisoners held by the United States up to 180, with more expected to follow as the hunt for Omar and bin Laden continues.

At present, the prisoners are being held in a variety of makeshift detention centers in Afghanistan. According to War Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, however, they’ll soon be sent to more permanent facilities at the U.S. naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. There, they will undergo further interrogation by the FBI and CIA and await trial, possibly by military tribunal. As of last week, the government was saying it has no plans to use Guantánamo for these tribunals.

The U.S. base at Guantánamo has a controversial history, and this will not be the first time it’s been used as a detention center. From late ’91 until June ’93, more than 260 HIV-positive Haitian refugees were held at the base after fleeing political violence in Haiti.

We’re joined right now by two people who were deeply involved at that time. Michael Ratner is a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Ninaj Raoul is director of Haitian Women for Haitian Refugees.

And we welcome you both to The War and Peace Report. Well, it’s actually, what, almost exactly 10 years ago that you were in Guantánamo. Is that right, Ninaj Raoul?

NINAJ RAOUL: That I was first in Guantánamo, yes.

AMY GOODMAN: And why were you there first?

NINAJ RAOUL: I went, actually, to work for the Justice Department, translating for
screenings, that — asylum screenings, pre-asylum screenings, that they were interviewing refugees, Haitian refugees, to see if they were allowed to come into the United States to apply for political asylum.

AMY GOODMAN: This was at the time of the coup?

NINAJ RAOUL: This was directly after the coup, just a few months after.

AMY GOODMAN: In Haiti.

NINAJ RAOUL: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: And what did you find there?

NINAJ RAOUL: Well, the interviews were pretty arbitrary. The asylum officers were not well trained. They weren’t well informed of country conditions in Haiti. So it was sort of like whatever goes, whatever happens. It was up to the individual’s discretion whether or not they would be — they weren’t making very informed, you know, decisions of whether or not these individuals would be allowed to come into the United States. And, you know, these people’s lives depended on it, because if they were — if they were denied, they were forcibly repatriated to Haiti. And when they returned in Haiti, they were probably persecuted by the same people that persecuted them to make them leave Haiti.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, the first time you were there, were people being held there, on Guantánamo?

NINAJ RAOUL: Yeah, I think there was about a total of 11,000 to 12,000 people at a time, but they were being trafficked through as they were screening them in and out. Most of them were screened out, meaning they were forcibly repatriated to Haiti. About 75% at the time was being returned to Haiti.

AMY GOODMAN: And you went back after months with journalists?

NINAJ RAOUL: Yeah, I went back months later, because I think there was a lawsuit, because journalists weren’t allowed to come on and interview the refugees. So, the first trip that — the journalists did win the lawsuit, and the first trip that they went, I went on that. And then I went back several times, because they had what was the first HIV detention center, the only one that I know of anyways. They were holding about 260 refugees. Out of the 12,000 that were screened in, 200 or so tested HIV-positive. So, because of the HIV exclusion ban in this country, they were not allowed to come into this country, and they couldn’t return to Haiti, because they would be persecuted upon their return.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Ratner, you were the lawyer who challenged the constitutionality of these detention camps. Can you talk about how you got involved? And then we will relate it to what we’re seeing today with al-Qaeda prisoners being brought to Guantánamo.

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, we were very concerned, because we’d gotten reports on the 260 people who were being held in these camps, and very concerned by the conditions that they were being held in and by the position of the United States. The United States government’s position — and I think that’s why they’re putting al-Qaeda people there — is that there is no U.S. law or other law that applies on Guantánamo, that they can do whatever they want to whoever is kept there, which means they — basically, when they were asked the question in court, “Does that mean you could torture people? What prevents you from doing that?” the answer was “Nothing, except basically our own so-called goodwill.” So, when you talk about other people being put there, you have to worry about that.

AMY GOODMAN: Wait. Explain why torture is not illegal there.

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, because they believe that no law applies there, that this is a base that’s under the complete control and jurisdiction of the United States, that at the same time as they believe that, that it still is the sovereignty of Cuba, in some way, although Cuba has no actual authority, and therefore they believe it’s essentially a lawless situation and that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t extend that far. Possibly international law does, but the U.S. believes it can override international law, and therefore, it can do what it wants to people there. They’d have no constitutional rights there. Our case actually held that there were some constitutional rights that people had, but then a higher court in another district, actually, said there were not. So I think one reason the U.S. is putting people there is because they basically have absolutely no rights. And I think the other reason is because it’s very bad access. I mean, journalists can’t go there very easily, as Ninaj can reflect.

When we went there, and Ninaj spent a lot more time in the camp than I did, but the conditions were absolutely unbearable. I mean, the place is really a hellhole. It’s not that bad for the servicemen who have set up a sort of, you know, McDonald’s and everything else on their part of the base, but where we were, which is a remote part of the camp on a desert surrounded by barbed wire, with detention facilities, really, in the heat and outside, it was really — it’s really unbearable. And I imagine that’s the kind of thing they’re thinking about here.

AMY GOODMAN: Ninaj, would you like to elaborate on those conditions? I remember repeatedly the Haitian detainees rising up against their captors about the conditions.

NINAJ RAOUL: Right. They were sleeping in these wooden barracks that, when it rained, which it rained often, the rain would leak through there, invaded by rats, scorpions, all sorts of insects. And it smelled. You know, of course, there was a stench. And it was pretty bad. And when the refugees did protests, they would organize protests to try to be heard, you know, and the military would react violently. You know, sometimes they would take them out and put them in isolations. They would put them in these separate jails. And they went as far as putting some in underground jails. And there was only about 200, 260 people, and they were being guarded by about 300 marines, so they were actually outnumbered. These were people that were victims of political persecution, but they were being treated like prisoners of war. And they were said to be HIV-positive, so therefore they were sick and they were victims, but they were treating these people like prisoners, a lot of verbal and physical abuse.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Ninaj Raoul, who’s director of Haitian Women for Haitian Refugees, in our firehouse studio, along with Michael Ratner, lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights, that challenged the constitutionality of holding people in detention at Guantánamo. What about the history of the Guantánamo naval base on Cuba and the U.S. relationship with Cuba, Michael?

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, the U.S. essentially is an occupying country on that base. It entered a treaty in 1904 after it had conquered Cuba in 1898 that essentially required Cuba to lease it the base. It renewed that lease in 1934, but again, essentially by force, because at that time it was in dominant control of Cuba. Cuba has been trying to nullify that lease since the revolutionary government took power in 1959. The original lease says it’s only to be used for a coaling station. Of course, it’s being used way beyond a coaling station. It’s being used to hold refugees — it was — and it will be used to hold al-Qaeda people.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, a coaling station?

MICHAEL RATNER: You know, for refueling of U.S. naval ships. That was the original purpose. It requires both countries to consent to cancelation of the lease. Cuba obviously wants to, actually hasn’t cashed the $4,085 check it gets every year for the lease of a 41-square-mile base. It’s basically an occupied territory of the United States that the United States is unwilling to give up. The Cuban position on at least this recent — the official position on this recent use of it for al-Qaeda has been that it’s not taking a position on it, although one of the vice presidents basically said, “This demonstrates the arrogance of” — one of the vice presidents of Cuba said, “This demonstrates the arrogance of empire,” by the United States doing this.

AMY GOODMAN: But Cuba has no say over who would be held at Guantánamo.

MICHAEL RATNER: Right. Cuba has absolutely no say over anything to do with Guantánamo at this point. It’s under the complete jurisdiction and control of the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, what about military tribunals? Could they be held right there?

MICHAEL RATNER: Sure. In fact, I think that despite their denials of that, I think there’s a fair chance they will be held there. I think there’s a fair chance for a number of reasons. One is because there is really no chance of an American court intervening at all, even on habeas corpus, presumably, which at least when they have an American court — a tribunal in the U.S., like they did during the Second World War, that there was a chance for habeas corpus in a U.S. court to see about the conditions of detention for people. Here, you have them in Guantánamo. A U.S. court is not going to — probably not going to take jurisdiction.

AMY GOODMAN: And so, what would a military tribunal look like? It’s a theme that we’ve come back to after — over these last few months. But how would people be tried? Would we know who they were? These military tribunals, could they impose the death penalty? And could someone be killed, where the public doesn’t even know who they are, and then just their body taken away?

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, certainly under the executive order, the military order issued by the president, they could be held in secret. They’re tried before five or seven military judges, who are [inaudible] of law, in fact. Almost any evidence can come in, even evidence from torture, which is one of the reasons I think they’re doing military tribunals, or from truth serums, however you want to look at it. They can be held completely in secret. They can be held in Guantánamo. The people can be executed, and they can be buried, presumably, in Guantánamo, and that will be the end of the matter. Guantánamo is a perfect place in that sense, I mean, because there is really — very hard to get to, as Ninaj can swear to. It takes hours to get to, and there’s no journalists. I mean, I think one of the first lawsuits we’re going to see here is lawsuits by journalists to try and get into Guantánamo to see the conditions.

AMY GOODMAN: Ninaj, you mentioned you were there with journalists after you had first been there to translate for the Immigration and Naturalization Service. What was it like? How did people get access? I remember, well, one of the former producers of Democracy Now!, Dan Coughlin, was involved with that first lawsuit to gain access for journalists to Guantánamo, and he was one of the first journalists there.

NINAJ RAOUL: Right. I had actually gone down with Dan Coughlin on that trip. And when we got there, basically, we got briefed by the military’s PR team, and, you know, saying how [inaudible] —

AMY GOODMAN: How did you get there?

NINAJ RAOUL: We had to take these small planes that carry about seven people. They were charter jets, I think from Fort Lauderdale at the time. And I think it takes about three hours and 45 minutes to get there on the flight. It’s really small plane, only seats seven people, with the baggage in the wings, and everything has to be — it was scary anyways. And it was long. It was a long flight. And once you get there, you were briefed by the military PR team about how everything — you know, their version of everything’s OK. And before you were allowed to go into the camp — the visit to the camp was very brief. I think maybe it was about an hour and a half. You know, you go a long way, and then you’re trying to speak to like 300 people, and it was so brief. But, you know, we were able to — 

AMY GOODMAN: And, of course, the military was all around as people spoke.

NINAJ RAOUL: The military was around, so, you know, people would say — some people probably didn’t speak as freely as others, but — or as freely as they wanted to. But that was basically it. And people tried to — they gave us an idea of the — the conditions were just deplorable, I mean.

AMY GOODMAN: Weren’t there also problems with people being out in the heat, unable to shelter themselves for many hours a day, which was over 100 degrees in the direct sun?

NINAJ RAOUL: Yeah. And originally, they would — the wooden barracks weren’t there. Originally, the refugees would stay — the larger population would stay in tents, and the tents were overcrowded. I mean, that there were like rows of cots that they slept in, and they were literally a couple inches apart, you know. And they would just stuff — they would stuff people in. So, if you want to get — if you want to get some air or get out of that tent, you were sleeping next to total strangers, too, and so it was dangerous in some conditions. So, if you wanted to be out, it was pretty hot there. It was in the high 90s, you know, 95 to 100 degrees, and the sun was scorching hot. So, there wasn’t an option. It was later on, when they decided they were going to keep these 200 and so refugees longer, that they built these wooden barracks.

AMY GOODMAN: And then, Michael, how, ultimately, did you get these detention camps closed down and the refugees that were being detained there freed?

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, I think the victory was really because of a huge grassroots movement in the United States to get the refugees out. We had court cases pending, which were bouncing around a lot and winning and losing.

AMY GOODMAN: You were up against the Clinton administration.

MICHAEL RATNER: We were suing — right, eventually. Initially, it was the Bush administration, and then Clinton, who promised to free the refugees and change all the policies — of course, did not. We kept going with our litigation. Eventually, we had a very good judge in Brooklyn named Judge Johnson, who gave us a victory. The Clinton administration, because of all the pressure on them by — there were colleges all over the country that were in revolt about it. It was called the Harriet Tubman Brigade that tried to end it. Eventually, the government did not appeal, and they freed the 260 people, many of whom came to New York, and many of whom Ninaj’s group wound up caring for, really.

AMY GOODMAN: So last words of warning as these first prisoners are most likely brought to Guantánamo Bay, as we revisit this chapter of U.S. history that started 10 years ago?

NINAJ RAOUL: Well, I just know that when the refugees were coming in from Haiti — and as I said, they were victims of political persecution — they were not allowed any counsel at all. And these were not criminals. You know, these people, these alleged criminals, I just can’t imagine that they’re going to have any kind of rights at all.

MICHAEL RATNER: I think that’s right. I mean, I think what you’re going to see here is no lawyers really able to get access, no journalists able to get access, no family able to get access, and the United States to continue to do whatever it wants to its prisoners, where there’s no ability of NGOs or other organizations to visit people. So I think it’s going to be very, very serious for those people, and a denial of basic fundamental rights that people are entitled to.

AMY GOODMAN: Ninaj Raoul, does Haitian Women for Haitian Refugees have a website?

NINAJ RAOUL: No, but we’re a project of Interreligious Foundation of Community Organizers, so sometimes you’ll find information on IFCO, IFCO.org.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s IFCO.org. And, Michael Ratner, your website?

MICHAEL RATNER: Well, there’s two. There’s CCR-NY.org, and there’s HumanRightsNow.org, both of which have a lot of information about the current situation.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both very much for being with us. When we come back, well, the ACLU is appealing to consulates from around the world to give up names of people who have been detained in the United States, to challenge the constitutionality of that detention. Stay with us.