The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently handed down a ruling that expands legal immunity for contractors of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involved in the development of controversial interrogation methods. The court’s decision, delivered by a three-judge panel, unanimously affirmed the dismissal of civil claims brought forward by Abu Zubaydah, a Guantanamo Bay detainee, against two psychologists responsible for designing interrogation techniques. Originally derived from the U.S. military’s Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program, these methods have been widely debated within the context of human rights and international law.
Central to this case was the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which allows non-U.S. citizens to bring civil actions in U.S. federal courts for violations of international law. However, the court found the Military Commissions Act (MCA) to be pivotal in determining jurisdiction. The panel concluded that even as contractors, the psychologists acted as government agents, which exempted them from the jurisdiction of federal courts concerning Zubaydah’s claims, as outlined in the Law of War provisions. The decision emphasizes that the agency relationship and authorization by the CIA defined their status, not merely their independent contractor label, as discussed by the court leveraging the Restatement (Third) of Agency.
Abu Zubaydah, captured in Pakistan in 2002 and later held in Guantanamo Bay under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) Act, has seen his case draw international scrutiny. Despite being subjected to interrogation practices such as waterboarding, his attempt to gain damages through the U.S. legal system has faced hurdles. The ruling draws from previous decisions that limited Zubaydah’s ability to gather evidence, citing the state secrets privilege.
This legal stance is consistent with prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions, including those from 2022 and 2023, which denied Zubaydah’s requests related to his CIA treatment. Nevertheless, the global legal landscape on this matter continues to evolve, indicated by the UK Supreme Court ruling allowing him to pursue claims against UK authorities, leaving room for potential international legal proceedings.
This decision marks an important chapter in the ongoing debate over accountability and the limits of contractor immunity in the realm of national security and international legal standards.