WASHINGTON, Oct 8: A corporate lawyer, who was involved in controversial 2002 White House debates on narrowing the definition of torture, on Friday suddenly withdrew his bid to become the second-ranking official at the Justice Department in what amounted to a new political setback for President George Bush.

In a brief announcement, the White House said it was recalling the nomination of Timothy Flanigan to become deputy attorney general that was sent to the Senate for confirmation last June.

No formal explanation was given, but in his resignation letter to Bush, Flanigan vaguely wrote about “uncertainty concerning the timing of my confirmation” as the main reason for his unwillingness to go through with the process.

The withdrawal followed a decision by the Senate Judiciary Committee to postpone a vote on Flanigan’s nomination that was to have taken place last week.

Instead, the committee planned to invite Flanigan to a second hearing later this month.

There it would question him about his role in setting the administration’s detainee interrogation policy when he worked at the White House during Bush’s first term.

It would also question him on his ties to high-profile Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is under investigation for allegedly mishandling Indian tribal funds as he lobbied on behalf of Indian gambling interests.

Flanigan, who is now general counsel at Tyco International, a major manufacturing conglomerate, has worked closely with Abramoff in that capacity.

But he was also deputy to current US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales when the latter worked at the White House as legal counsel to Bush during the president’s first term.

At that time, the White House was actively involved in discussing a 2002 memorandum written by the Justice Department that in essence called for narrowing the definition of torture to allow for forceful interrogation of prisoners captured in Afghanistan, Iraq and other parts of the world as part of the war on terror.

The ill-fated document, later repudiated by the administration under public pressure, suggested that only acts causing “organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death” should meet the legal definition of torture.

Techniques like hand-slapping, threats of live burial and simulated drownings could be acceptable to make certain prisoners talk. —AFP