Ethics Newsline®

WASHINGTON
What may be the dominant ethics issue of the year resurfaced again last week during the confirmation hearings of Michael Mukasey, the nominee for U.S. attorney general, when he was quizzed on the limits and definitions of torture.

While Mukasey contended that torture is unconstitutional and he would not endorse it as attorney general, he would not comment on specific “harsh” interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, a procedure that involves pouring water over the face of a prisoner, simulating the effect of drowning, UPI reports.

Mukasey’s responses during his confirmation hearings before a Senate panel are being closely watched worldwide, reports the Christian Science Monitor, because the appearance that the United States has relaxed standards governing the treatment of prisoners since September 11 has damaged the nation’s reputation abroad.

Mukasey said he was not familiar with the nuances of waterboarding, and said it is difficult for him to define which specific techniques should be classified as cruel, inhumane, or degrading, reports the McClatchy newspaper syndicate.

“We have to also recognize that when we’re talking about coercive methods of interrogation, this is not a matter of choosing pleasant alternatives over unpleasant alternatives,” he said, according to the McClatchy report. “It’s a choice among bad alternatives.”

Mukasey also raised eyebrows when he suggested that President Bush could ignore statutes on government surveillance during wartime, reports the Washington Post.

The Post notes, however, that while several of the exchanges during the second and final day of Mukasey’s hearing were tense, most observers predict he will have little trouble being confirmed once the nomination moves to the floor for a full Senate vote.