No Surprise Here
The war crimes trials of detainees at Guantanamo Bay are back on track, thanks to a decision by a newly designed military appeals court. From today's NY Times:
A special military appeals court, overturning a lower court ruling, on Monday removed a legal hurdle that has derailed war crime trials for detainees at Guantanámo Bay, Cuba.
The ruling allows military prosecutors to address a legal flaw that had ground the prosecutions to a halt. The decision, by a three-judge panel of a newly formed military appeals court, was an important victory for the government in its protracted efforts to begin prosecuting some of the 340 detainees at Guantánamo.
The legal flaw involved a requirement by Congress that before the detainees could be tried in military tribunals, they had to be formally declared “alien unlawful enemy combatants.” The problem for prosecutors was that while the detainees had been found by a military panel to be enemy combatants, they had not been specifically found to be unlawful.
Lawyers said there was legal uncertainly about whether the defense could appeal Monday’s ruling, which came in the case of Omar Ahmed Khadr, a Canadian detainee who was charged with killing an American soldier in a firefight and other crimes.
Dennis Edney, Mr. Khadr’s Canadian lawyer, said the defense was considering whether to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. If there is an appeal, it could delay the resumption of Guantánamo cases yet again.
Essentially the "appellate" ruling held that the trial judge had the power to hear evidence on the issue of whether the detainees were "unlawful" enemy combatants, i.e. were not in uniform or were carrying hidden weapons, necessary for the court's jurisdiction under the Military Commissions Act.
The question of further appeal is an interesting one. The military doesn't want the detainees to have the right of appealing to civilian courts, and the Act seems to imply that the detainees do not have that right. Otherwise, the existence of the new appeals division in the military system doesn't make much sense. The effect of such an interpretation is, of course, that for the detainees they have a kangaroo trial court and a kangaroo appellate court for redress. Period.
Mr. Edney pretty much summed up the box his client is in:
Mr. Edney said he was disappointed by the military panel’s ruling but not surprised. “Omar Khadr still faces a process that is tainted, and designed to make a finding of guilt,” he said.
Exactly.
A special military appeals court, overturning a lower court ruling, on Monday removed a legal hurdle that has derailed war crime trials for detainees at Guantanámo Bay, Cuba.
The ruling allows military prosecutors to address a legal flaw that had ground the prosecutions to a halt. The decision, by a three-judge panel of a newly formed military appeals court, was an important victory for the government in its protracted efforts to begin prosecuting some of the 340 detainees at Guantánamo.
The legal flaw involved a requirement by Congress that before the detainees could be tried in military tribunals, they had to be formally declared “alien unlawful enemy combatants.” The problem for prosecutors was that while the detainees had been found by a military panel to be enemy combatants, they had not been specifically found to be unlawful.
Lawyers said there was legal uncertainly about whether the defense could appeal Monday’s ruling, which came in the case of Omar Ahmed Khadr, a Canadian detainee who was charged with killing an American soldier in a firefight and other crimes.
Dennis Edney, Mr. Khadr’s Canadian lawyer, said the defense was considering whether to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. If there is an appeal, it could delay the resumption of Guantánamo cases yet again.
Essentially the "appellate" ruling held that the trial judge had the power to hear evidence on the issue of whether the detainees were "unlawful" enemy combatants, i.e. were not in uniform or were carrying hidden weapons, necessary for the court's jurisdiction under the Military Commissions Act.
The question of further appeal is an interesting one. The military doesn't want the detainees to have the right of appealing to civilian courts, and the Act seems to imply that the detainees do not have that right. Otherwise, the existence of the new appeals division in the military system doesn't make much sense. The effect of such an interpretation is, of course, that for the detainees they have a kangaroo trial court and a kangaroo appellate court for redress. Period.
Mr. Edney pretty much summed up the box his client is in:
Mr. Edney said he was disappointed by the military panel’s ruling but not surprised. “Omar Khadr still faces a process that is tainted, and designed to make a finding of guilt,” he said.
Exactly.
Labels: Guantanamo Bay, Military Commissions Act
posted by Diane at 4:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home