Justice Delayed
Earlier this week, Ruth commented (here) on the extraordinary dismissal of two cases in Guantanamo Bay by commissioners who pointed out that the government had screwed up the pleadings by naming the defendants as "enemy combatants" rather than "unlawful enemy combatants" as required under the new-and-improved Military Commissions Act. The dismissals were, of course, quite correct. The gang-who-can't-shoot-straight apparently also can't draft pleadings worth a damn either.
Our neighbors to the North have a special interest in these proceedings, because one of those cases dismissed (for the second time) involves a Canadian citizen, Omar Khadr. A June 5, 2007 editorial in Toronto's The Star has more of the details on Mr. Khadr's case.
American prosecutors have had five years to put Khadr on trial for murder for throwing a grenade that killed U.S. Army medic Sgt. Christopher Speer in Afghanistan in 2002. At the time, Khadr was a 15-year-old Al Qaeda "child terrorist," prosecutors allege.
Twice, Khadr has been charged. Twice, the charges have been stayed.
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the original "military commission" process Washington created to try Guantanamo detainees was unconstitutional, quashing the first set of charges.
And yesterday Col. Peter Brownback, presiding over Khadr's case, threw into chaos Washington's bid to get the commissions up and running again. He dismissed the reinstated charges against Khadr on a technicality. Brownback ruled, correctly, that the U.S. Congress empowered the commissions to try only "unlawful enemy combatants." But U.S. officials never did designate Khadr and 380 other detainees as "unlawful" combatants; they merely called them "enemy combatants." Strictly speaking, the commissions have no right to try them. That leaves U.S. prosecutors scrambling to get them redesignated. ...
This is legal anarchy. Washington appears determined to rewrite the rules until it manages to secure a conviction. ...
Even if Khadr is redesignated an "unlawful" combatant by some contorted retroactive legal wizardry, laying charges a third time will look like persecution, not justice. [Emphasis added]
It will look like "persecution, not justice" only because that is what it is. Well, that and an attempt to cover the backsides of an administration which at this point (fortunately) is simply incapable of dealing effectively with any kind of push-back challenge to its presumed total authority.
The editorial calls for the release of Mr. Khadr to Canadian authorities for the appropriate legal proceedings. While I doubt that the Bush administration would ever consider such a rational solution to the triple jeopardy issue now facing Mr. Khadr and three hundred other detainees in Guantanamo, at least Mr. Khadr would be subject to real, live due process. That is something he can't currently get from the United States.
How tragic is that?
Our neighbors to the North have a special interest in these proceedings, because one of those cases dismissed (for the second time) involves a Canadian citizen, Omar Khadr. A June 5, 2007 editorial in Toronto's The Star has more of the details on Mr. Khadr's case.
American prosecutors have had five years to put Khadr on trial for murder for throwing a grenade that killed U.S. Army medic Sgt. Christopher Speer in Afghanistan in 2002. At the time, Khadr was a 15-year-old Al Qaeda "child terrorist," prosecutors allege.
Twice, Khadr has been charged. Twice, the charges have been stayed.
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the original "military commission" process Washington created to try Guantanamo detainees was unconstitutional, quashing the first set of charges.
And yesterday Col. Peter Brownback, presiding over Khadr's case, threw into chaos Washington's bid to get the commissions up and running again. He dismissed the reinstated charges against Khadr on a technicality. Brownback ruled, correctly, that the U.S. Congress empowered the commissions to try only "unlawful enemy combatants." But U.S. officials never did designate Khadr and 380 other detainees as "unlawful" combatants; they merely called them "enemy combatants." Strictly speaking, the commissions have no right to try them. That leaves U.S. prosecutors scrambling to get them redesignated. ...
This is legal anarchy. Washington appears determined to rewrite the rules until it manages to secure a conviction. ...
Even if Khadr is redesignated an "unlawful" combatant by some contorted retroactive legal wizardry, laying charges a third time will look like persecution, not justice. [Emphasis added]
It will look like "persecution, not justice" only because that is what it is. Well, that and an attempt to cover the backsides of an administration which at this point (fortunately) is simply incapable of dealing effectively with any kind of push-back challenge to its presumed total authority.
The editorial calls for the release of Mr. Khadr to Canadian authorities for the appropriate legal proceedings. While I doubt that the Bush administration would ever consider such a rational solution to the triple jeopardy issue now facing Mr. Khadr and three hundred other detainees in Guantanamo, at least Mr. Khadr would be subject to real, live due process. That is something he can't currently get from the United States.
How tragic is that?
Labels: Guantanamo Bay, Military Commissions Act
posted by Diane at 11:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home