Show Trials Redux
Last month, I noted the Justice Department's outrageous stance on limiting the access of Guantanamo Bay detainees to their lawyers. In today's NY Times we learn that the DOJ has backed down on one (and only one) of their proposals:
In a court filing yesterday morning, department lawyers said they were no longer asking the appeals court in Washington to limit the lawyers to three visits with detainees at the Guantánamo naval base, where about 380 men are now held. ...
But the filing made clear that the administration would continue to seek other limitations on the lawyers. These would include requests to permit only one visit for a detainee to authorize a lawyer to handle his case; to screen mail sent by lawyers; and to allow government officials, on their own, to deny lawyers access to secret evidence used against detainees by military panels. [Emphasis added]
In other words, instead of tying both of the lawyer's hands, only one hand and three fingers would be so restrained. That's a big improvement, isn't it?
Hardly. All three of the remaining proposals are designed to cripple the defense, and that last one is a real killer. The very idea of "secret evidence" stinks of Soviet-era show trials and gulags.
Once again, this government is negotiating with itself in the face of certain defeat. Enough hell was raised by lawyers' groups, civil rights' groups, and unaffiliated citizens' groups that the DOJ got the message that this was another one of those court battles they just might lose. So they did what they have done in the past: they did a partial back-down, but only at the last minute, as noted in the article.
The filing came days before arguments are scheduled in a case that has become one of the main battlegrounds in the legal struggle over the administration’s detention policies. In that case, eight detainees have challenged the findings that they are properly being held as enemy combatants. Arguments are scheduled for Tuesday in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. ...
That ought to impress the court, eh?
What a despicable perversion of justice.
In a court filing yesterday morning, department lawyers said they were no longer asking the appeals court in Washington to limit the lawyers to three visits with detainees at the Guantánamo naval base, where about 380 men are now held. ...
But the filing made clear that the administration would continue to seek other limitations on the lawyers. These would include requests to permit only one visit for a detainee to authorize a lawyer to handle his case; to screen mail sent by lawyers; and to allow government officials, on their own, to deny lawyers access to secret evidence used against detainees by military panels. [Emphasis added]
In other words, instead of tying both of the lawyer's hands, only one hand and three fingers would be so restrained. That's a big improvement, isn't it?
Hardly. All three of the remaining proposals are designed to cripple the defense, and that last one is a real killer. The very idea of "secret evidence" stinks of Soviet-era show trials and gulags.
Once again, this government is negotiating with itself in the face of certain defeat. Enough hell was raised by lawyers' groups, civil rights' groups, and unaffiliated citizens' groups that the DOJ got the message that this was another one of those court battles they just might lose. So they did what they have done in the past: they did a partial back-down, but only at the last minute, as noted in the article.
The filing came days before arguments are scheduled in a case that has become one of the main battlegrounds in the legal struggle over the administration’s detention policies. In that case, eight detainees have challenged the findings that they are properly being held as enemy combatants. Arguments are scheduled for Tuesday in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. ...
That ought to impress the court, eh?
What a despicable perversion of justice.
Labels: Guantanamo Bay, Justice Department
posted by Diane at 4:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home