It's painful to even try to address a story like this, but it's one of those things that needs to be out in the open, recognized, and acted upon. The Nation has a gut-wrenching article about yet another rape perpetrated against a KBR employee in Iraq, and the subsequent (inevitable, horrifying) cover-up by KBR and neglect by our government. This is ugly, ugly stuff (trigger warning):Boldfacing added by me.
... [You can go to the link if you want to see the segment of the story discussing the brutality inflicted by a soldier and a fellow contractor.]
Did KBR jump to action? Did the US government take steps to address this horror? Of course not. KBR tried to cover it up, told her to keep quiet, tried to compel her to sign nondisclosure agreements, and spied on her. The US took no steps to prosecute.
And here where it gets a little bit technical: In terms of redress for harm, there are usually two routes a person can go -- criminal and civil. For criminal prosecution, contractors working in Iraq are currently immune from Iraqi law, and their legal status under US law is murky at best. In theory, according to the article, the Justice Department could bring criminal charges in federal court, but that's up to a prosecutor. Since a contractor in Iraq wouldn't have standing in any federal district court, I'm guessing -- though I'm not 100% sure and would welcome more informed commentary -- DOJ proper would have to bring criminal charges. Now, less than a month ago, SecDef Gates issued a directive allowing for UCMJ authority over civilian contractors, meaning that military police now have authority over contractors, at least in theory, though obviously MPs are not generally in the business of policing contractors.
Overall, though, in five years of war, with 180,000 civilian contractors working in Iraq, not a single criminal charge has been brought against any of them. You think among 180,000 people in the middle of a war zone some crimes are being committed? Maybe? But there are no police officers, no clear legal authority or system, and apparently no interest in or process for holding people accountable for their crimes committed overseas. A nonprofit recently set up to support contractors with incidents of sexual assault or harassment has 40 reports already; again, no criminal charges filed. Ever. In five years.
On the civil side, all sorts of torts were (allegedly) committed against the subject of the article (assault, battery, false imprisonment, and IIED, at the very least), which would ordinarily allow for a lawsuit, which could also shed some light on the larger problem (through discovery processes, publicity, etc). Enter, however, one of the more malicious legal developments of recent years: the binding arbitration clause. Natasha Chart has an excellent and comprehensive rundown, the short version of which is that a skyrocketing number of contracts include language barring civil court remedies in favor of closed, non-public, and unappealable arbitration. Initially used primarily in consumer contracts, binding arbitration clauses are increasingly snuck into employment contracts, and they often -- unconscionably, in my admittedly inexpert view -- cover intentional torts as well as negligence. It's really a horrible and horrifying situation, and it should offend any reasonable person's sense of justice.
Congress is looking into it -- at the behest of, in particular, Rep. Poe and Rep. Conyers -- and one can only hope they, y'know, do something to fix this, both on an individual level and as a matter of overall policy.
So we have managed to set up a system where women, effectively, going to Iraq to serve or help rebuild are easy targets for rapes, brutality, and general cruelty. Is that part of Bush romantic vision? Is it part of McCain's Surge success?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment