The suit is believed to be the first to try to hold U.S. officials accountable for the abuse at prisons.

As noncitizens of the U.S., the detainees, however, might not be allowed to pursue their claims in U.S. court, the Los Angeles Times reported, quoting a judge.

This indicates the flare up of the debate over abuses in U.S. military prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan. The scandal triggered worldwide outcry and forced an overhaul of U.S. interrogation rules.

In U.S. District Court, lawyers for Iraqi and Afghan civilians said Rumsfeld and the officers, two of whom have retired, violated U.S. and international law and should be held personally responsible for the abuse they say their clients suffered, said the paper.

The ex-prisoners said in the suit that they were beaten to the point of unconsciousness, mutilated, stabbed and urinated on, and endured mock executions, among other abuses.

They were among the thousands of prisoners held by the U.S. military at Abu Ghraib and other locations in Iraq and Afghanistan,including detention facilities in Kandahar and Bagram.

They asked the court to award unspecified monetary damages and to declare their treatment illegal.

U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan indicated he was sympathetic to the former detainees' plight, but he questioned whether they had the right under the U.S. Constitution to sue.

"It's unfortunate, to say the least, that there has to be an argument that U.S. military officials tortured citizens of another country," Hogan was quoted as saying. "That being said, there is substantial difficulty in recognizing claims of noncitizens held in other countries."

Government lawyers argued that the suit should be dismissed because Rumsfeld was immune from being sued for acting within the course of his official duties.

The lawyers also said the suit would expand foreign citizens' rights to file lawsuits in U.S. courts far beyond what the Supreme Court has allowed.