Legal Critics to the US Actions in the Movie the Road to Guantanamo

Road to Guantanamo

The docudrama, the Road to Guantanamo, the 2006 film by Matt Whitecross and Michael Winterbottom provided a unique look at the complexities and difficulties of enforcing international cooperation. This thrilling tale of the now famous "Tipton Three" British men of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin who, through a combination of poor decision-making and violations of international law, allows the viewer to examine these modern problems using the war on terrorism as a means of telling the story. The purpose of this essay is to examine this film and highlight five separate violations of international cooperation using the articles of the Geneva Conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a guide and authority of the discussion.

The first violation of international cooperation is evident at the beginning of the film. The film is taking place under the conditions at the beginning of the war on terror in 2001. The actions taken by the United States military and the actual bombing campaigns against Afghanistan violates the Geneva Convention, as innocent citizens are ruthlessly murdered by American jets not distinguishing between civilian and combatant as expressed in these powerful articles. This violation does give us the premise to analyze the argument with more examples. Because of this bombing raids, these three men on a private venture are taken away by force after surviving one of these attacks. Here the United States now commits various other violations of both the Geneva Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights explains and reinforces the inalienable rights of every living human. The 30 articles that explicitly give this document the authority to suggest an implied moral behavior encompasses the true human spirit and should be supported and exalted by everyone. This second example expresses the totality of war and all of its initiators as guilty of violating the very essence of this proposal. Understanding the premise to which these bombing raids are related to suggest that revenge and violence is an appropriate response to any form of coercion. The horrible events of September 11, 2011, and the eventual changes these events would propel, do not excuse the retaliation methods demonstrated then and now in any legal sense.

These three men, guilty of no crime, are eventually extradited to Guantanamo Bay Cuba to be held for questioning and punishment as an enemy combatant. In no shape or form are these men combatants and no one may have a legal authority claiming they are. Evidence was never presented as to why they were selected for this treatment, clearly violating many articles within the declaration, but specifically article 11 where due process and official charge are required to mandate such actions. An argument can be made that this violates article 8 as well. Article 8 states that everyone has the right to an effective tribunal, and in the methods demonstrated a Guantanamo Bay clearly do not resemble confidence or effectiveness.

The Geneva Convention articles were created at the end of World War II in order to remember the horrible crimes committed during this brutal campaign. Innocent lives were lost during this time by various ways including concentration camps and by nuclear weaponry. Generations of different ethnic groups were wiped out all around the world in different campaigns. It seems as though these lessons have been forgotten in this movie when its definition of war crimes becomes relevant again in these campaign of the war on terror. The fourth Geneva Convention gave explicit terms for national war crimes and their accompanying punishments. Willfully killing or torturing or even willfully depriving someone of a fair trial amounts to a hostage who is been taken with cruel prisoner treatments. It seems this is a very obvious and explicit violation of the Geneva Convention as the United States and its allies remove everyday people from their everyday circumstances and ship them away to an unknown land to await torturous behavior and cruel company.

It must be fair to ask if these violations by the United States are indeed valid. The United States government is a combination of two different and distinct personalities one that offers great comfort and aid in times of need, and one who doles great punishment when its wishes are ignored. It should therefore seem that if an act against such a force is determined to be against its wishes, any retaliation should be comparatively addressed. Those responsible for 9/11 have never been brought to trial, and in some cases no one is really sure how, who, or where the original crime for this tragedy and its ensuing war on terrorism can be explained. But regardless of this isolated example, it does not give the authority to condone and especially conduct the exact same acts of aggression and violence.

As the story continues in the Road to Guantanamo, the idea of torture, and what consists of torture is significantly explained and put to question. It seems as if in recent years the idea of torture and what consists of torture has shifted depending on who is doing this torture and who is receiving it. Torture is undoubtedly a relative term and hard to pinpoint, but the legal authority in both the Geneva convention articles and within the Declaration of Human Rights provide clear and realistic guidelines in any application or understanding of the uses of torture. Article 5 is the explicit documentation in the declaration as it clearly states that no one should be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. The Geneva Convention articles support of this is common throughout the entire theme of the documents. Prisoners of war are explicitly not allowed to be tortured for information. The United States government tried to define these young man as soldiers but even using their own definitions they have violated their rules.