PROVIDENCE — A new report concludes that all U.S. personnel who engage in the CIA’s so-called “enhanced” interrogation techniques — sanctioned by executive order last week — “are at serious risk of violating U.S. law,” and therefore at risk for criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act.

The report, “Leave No Marks, ‘Enhanced’ Interrogation Techniques and the Risk of Criminality,” was chiefly written by Dr. Scott Allen, clinical assistant professor at Brown University and member of Physicians for Human Rights. Allen is the lead medical author among three main authors. Six Brown medical students from the Class of 2010 assisted.

Physicians for Human Rights and Human Rights First, the two non-governmental organizations that collaborated on the report, released it yesterday in Boston. Both organizations have been leaders in the fight against torture.

“What we found was that it’s pretty clear these techniques the administration has argued are not harmful, in fact, are quite harmful,” said Allen. “There are long-term consequences — things like PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder); psychosis, substance abuse, and suicide.”

The report examines what are believed to be 10 techniques included in the Central Intelligence Agency’s “enhanced” interrogation program: stress positions; beating; water-boarding (mock drowning); exposure to extreme cold or heat; threat of humiliation to self, family or friends; sleep deprivation; sensory bombardment; violent shaking, sexual humiliation, and prolonged isolation.

The report notes that while the Bush administration’s executive order interprets the application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions “to a program of detention and interrogation by the CIA,” but does not clarify what techniques the CIA can and cannot lawfully engage in, “and fails explicitly to rule out the use of the ‘enhanced’ techniques that the CIA authorized in March 2002.”

In a phone interview, Allen said one of the report’s main accomplishments “is to introduce objective data to the discussion, including scientific evidence and clinical expertise.” Too often, the discussions have been hypothetical, Allen said, “and there have even been “some false impressions” created through the entertainment media, such as the popular TV series, 24.

The report is titled “Leave no Marks,” because the “enhanced” interrogation techniques “were designed to inflict pain, but leave no marks.” In fact, “there are at least several deaths that we know of, that have occurred because of these techniques,” Allen said. “These techniques were designed to be harmful. That’s their purpose.”

Asked whether he believes there is any chance of future criminal prosecution of the CIA, administration officials or interrogators under the War Crimes Act, Allen said, “I’ve treated that as a question for another day. All we’ve done is to try to give fair warning to people on the frontlines who have been advised by administration that what they’re doing is legal, our reading of both the law, combined with the medical evidence, suggests that they are criminally liable should they engage in the use of these techniques.”

Key recommendations include that the executive branch prohibit the “enhanced” interrogation techniques; instruct all U.S. interrogators in effective, legal, non-harmful interrogation methods; and declassify and release all documents from all relevant U.S. agencies “which contain information on U.S. interrogation policy and practice, including but not limited to the ‘enhanced’ interrogation methods.”

kziner@projo.com