Supreme Court Awards Habeas Corpus To Guantanamo Detainees

oralloy wrote:

I don't see the mess. The administration considers them to be unlawful combatants (with some justification).

And that's the mess.

The term 'unlawful combatant' doesn't seem to be a legal term.

To me, it seems that 'unlawful combatant' is merely a PR term, coined by the Bush administration in order to be able to refuse detainees the protection of Geneva Convention governing treatment of prisoners in wartime as well as any other rights under national or international law.

Again, I might be wrong, and you might be able to link to the legal definition of what an 'unlawful combatant' actually is. I doubt it, though.

80. Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Engage in Hostilities
Persons, such as guerrillas and partisans, who take up arms and commit hostile acts without having complied with the conditions prescribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents (see GPW, art. 4; par. 61 herein), are, when captured by the injured party, not entitled to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment.

81. Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Commit Hostile Acts
Persons who, without having complied with the conditions prescribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents (see GPW, art. 4; par. 61 herein), commit hostile acts about or behind the lines of the enemy are not to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment. Such acts include, but are not limited to, sabotage, destruction of communications facilities, intentional misleading of troops by guides, liberation of prisoners of war, and other acts not falling within Articles 104 and 106 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Article 29 of the Hague Regulations.

82. Penalties for the Foregoing
Persons in the foregoing categories who have attempted, committed, or conspired to commit hostile or belligerent acts are subject to the extreme penalty of death because of the danger inherent in their conduct. Lesser penalties may, however, be imposed.

http://www.usmc.mil/news/publications/Documents/FM%2027-10%20W%20CH%201.pdf

By universal agreement and practice the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations7 and also between [317 U.S. 1, 31] those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. 8 The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.

http://laws.findlaw.com/us/317/1.html

With this Supreme Court decision, we not only cannot hold and interrogate these people as prisoners of a war in efforts to gain information and save lives in the fight agains terrorist networks as we have done so far,

We have even had McCain calling for closing Gitmo, which is insanity. Where do we put these people, in the federal prison system, stateside?

US asks to rewrite detainee evidence

U.S. court dismisses case by Canadian at Guantanamo

By James Vicini
Fri Jun 20, 1:07 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal appeals court ruled on Friday it cannot act on an appeal by a young Canadian until after his case has been decided at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp where he faces charges of murdering a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan.

The unanimous three-judge panel dismissed the appeal by Omar Khadr, who is scheduled to go on trial before a war crimes court on October 8.

The appeals court ruled that a 2006 law limits its jurisdiction to cases only after final judgments have been made by a military commission.

In June last year, the military judge presiding over Khadr's commission dismissed all charges on the grounds that he had been designated an "enemy combatant," and not an "unlawful enemy combatant" as required by law.

But a special military appeals court overturned the decision and ruled that Khadr's case could go forward. Khadr's attorneys appealed that decision to the U.S. appeals court in Washington.

They argued the public interest required the appeals court to review procedural issues to make sure the military commissions operate fairly and conform with the law. They said the appeals court should not wait until after his trial.

But Chief Judge David Sentelle, who wrote the opinion for the three-judge panel, disagreed. He said that once a final judgment has been rendered in the case, Khadr can then raise the issue, as well as any other issues.

Khadr, 21, is charged with murdering U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer with a grenade during a firefight at a suspected al Qaeda compound in Afghanistan in 2002.

He was 15 when captured and is one of two Guantanamo detainees captured as juveniles and charged with crimes that carry a maximum penalty of life in prison.

The other, Afghan captive Mohammed Jawad, is accused of throwing a grenade into a U.S. military jeep at a bazaar in Kabul in December 2002, shortly after the United States invaded Afghanistan to oust al Qaeda and its Taliban protectors following the September 11 attacks.

(Additional reporting by Jane Sutton in Miami, editing by Deborah Charles and Vicki Allen)

Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.