The US Senate and George Bush are engaged in debate about the treatment of detainees - like those at Gitmo - in the light of the US Supreme Court having recently struck down military commissions.
The various matters under consideration are horrendous. For instance, abolishing the right to habeas corpus and torture without accountability. Even more troubling - that anyone can even consider this is a real worry! - is the proposal that a detainee could be tried and sentenced without ever seeing or challenging any evidence against him or her or even being present at any hearing. End result could be that a person could be executed without knowing the evidence against them.
Read this interesting interview on Democracy Now with Michael Ratner of the Centre for Constitutional Rights [incidentally a lawyer for David Hicks] here - where Ratner explains the ramifications of what is under consideration.
The Boston Globe, here, also carries an article on the same subject:
"TRUST US. You're guilty. We're going to execute you, but we can't tell you why." That is how Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, characterized the Bush administration's recent proposal for a draconian new trial system to deal with accused terrorists. The plan includes a reinterpretation of prisoner protections guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions. Graham was joined in opposition last week by other Republicans, including Colin Powell. Remarkably , lawyers in the Pentagon also raised objections. But the White House argument is straightforward: terrorists are such a mortal threat that established due process must be suspended. In particular, the classified secrets of anti terrorist operations must be so closely held that the most basic pillar of jurisprudence -- the accused's right to know and respond to evidence -- must be discarded. The legislation was drafted by Franz Kafka."
The various matters under consideration are horrendous. For instance, abolishing the right to habeas corpus and torture without accountability. Even more troubling - that anyone can even consider this is a real worry! - is the proposal that a detainee could be tried and sentenced without ever seeing or challenging any evidence against him or her or even being present at any hearing. End result could be that a person could be executed without knowing the evidence against them.
Read this interesting interview on Democracy Now with Michael Ratner of the Centre for Constitutional Rights [incidentally a lawyer for David Hicks] here - where Ratner explains the ramifications of what is under consideration.
The Boston Globe, here, also carries an article on the same subject:
"TRUST US. You're guilty. We're going to execute you, but we can't tell you why." That is how Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, characterized the Bush administration's recent proposal for a draconian new trial system to deal with accused terrorists. The plan includes a reinterpretation of prisoner protections guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions. Graham was joined in opposition last week by other Republicans, including Colin Powell. Remarkably , lawyers in the Pentagon also raised objections. But the White House argument is straightforward: terrorists are such a mortal threat that established due process must be suspended. In particular, the classified secrets of anti terrorist operations must be so closely held that the most basic pillar of jurisprudence -- the accused's right to know and respond to evidence -- must be discarded. The legislation was drafted by Franz Kafka."
Comments