(ALEXANDRIA, Va.) – A U.S. judge on Tuesday awarded $42 million to three former inmates of Iraq's notorious Abu Ghraib prison, holding a Virginia-based military contractor guilty of complicity in their torture and abuse over the past two decades.
The eight-person jury's decision came after a different jury earlier this year disagreed on whether Reston, Virginia-based CACI should be held accountable for the work of its investigators who worked with the U.S. Army at Abu Ghraib in 2003. and 2004.
The jury awarded plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Salah Al-Ejaili and Asa'ad Al-Zubae $3 million each in compensatory damages and $11 million each in punitive damages.
All three of them stated that they were beaten, sexually assaulted, forcibly stripped naked and subjected to other tortures in prison.
They did not suspect that CACI interrogators perpetrated torture themselves, but said that CACI was involved because its interrogators met with military police to “soften” prisoners for harsher interrogation.
CACI's attorney, John O'Connor, did not comment after Tuesday's ruling on whether the company would appeal.
Baher Azmy, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights, who filed the case on behalf of the plaintiffs, called the decision “an important step for Justice and accountability” and praised the three plaintiffs for their perseverance, “especially in front of everyone.” obstacles that CACI has thrown in the way.”
$42 million is fully in line with the amount sought by the plaintiffs, Azmy said.
“Today is a big day for me and justice,” said Al-Ejaili, a journalist, in a written statement. “I have been waiting for this day for a long time. This victory is not only for the three plaintiffs in this case against the organization. This victory is a bright light for everyone who has been oppressed and is a strong warning to any company or contractor that engages in various forms of harassment and abuse.”
Al-Ejaili traveled to the US to personally testify in both cases. Two other plaintiffs testified via video from Iraq.
The trial and retrial was the first time a US judge heard claims brought by Abu Ghraib survivors in the 20 years since images of the ill-treatment of detainees – complete with smiling US soldiers torturing them – shocked the world during the US invasion of Iraq.
None of the three plaintiffs were ever in any of the infamous photos shown in news reports around the world, but they described treatment very similar to that shown.
Al Shimari described being sexually abused and beaten during her two months in prison. He also said that he was electrocuted and dragged to prison with a rope tied around his neck. Al-Ejaili said he was under pressure which caused him to vomit black liquid. He was also deprived of sleep, forced to wear women's underwear and threatened with dogs.
CACI has argued that it has nothing to do with the torture of detainees. It said its employees had little contact with the three plaintiffs in the case, and CACI questioned parts of the plaintiffs' stories, saying military records contradicted their claims and suggested they include their stories to support the case against the contractor. Basically, however, CACI said that any liability for their mistreatment lies with the government.
As in the first trial, the jury struggled to decide whether CACI or the Army should be held responsible for any misconduct by CACI investigators. The judge raised questions in his deliberations about whether the contractor or the Army was responsible.
CACI, as one of its defenses, said that it should not be responsible for any wrongdoings of its employees if they are under the control and direction of the Army. under the legal system known as the “borrowed servants” doctrine.
The plaintiffs' lawyers argued that CACI was responsible for the mistakes of its employees. They said the provisions of CACI's contract with the Army, as well as the Army Field Manual, make it clear that CACI is responsible for supervising its personnel.
The case was first filed in 2008 but was delayed by 15 years of legal wrangling and multiple attempts by CACI to have the case dismissed.
Lawyers for the three plaintiffs argued that CACI was responsible for their mistreatment even if they could not prove that CACI investigators were the direct perpetrators of abuse.
The evidence included reports from two retired army generals, who documented the abuses and concluded that many CACI investigators were complicit in the abuses.
Those reports concluded that one of the interrogators, Steven Stefanowicz, lied to investigators about his conduct and that he allegedly ordered soldiers to mistreat detainees and use dogs to intimidate detainees during interrogations.
Stefanowicz testified for CACI during the trial via videotape and denied mistreating prisoners.
Source link
