Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Gitmo in Disarray, But Pentagon Moves Full Speed Ahead with Military Commissions

By Andy Worthington, Andy Worthington's Blog. Posted June 3, 2008.


With four more prisoners charged last week, the Bush administration seems intent on trying as many Guantánamo detainees as possible before November.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Andy Worthington

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Like alcoholics queuing up drinks at closing time, the Bush administration is pressing charges against prisoners at Guantánamo at a frantic rate, anxious to be seen to be validating the chronic lawlessness of the last seven years before November's Presidential election.

At the end of last week, four more prisoners were put forward for trial by Military Commission (the show trials conceived by Dick Cheney in November 2001), bringing to 20 the total number charged -- although one of the 20, David Hicks, opted for a plea bargain last year so that he could return home to Australia, and another, Mohammed al-Qahtani, had his charges dropped last month, when, it appears, the authorities realized that his torture in Guantánamo was far too publicly available to risk it being brought forward as evidence in a trial.

None of the cases has yet come to trial, as the business of arraignments and pre-trial hearings has been so time-consuming and fraught with problems that the fragile veneer of Congress-sanctioned legitimacy that cloaks the Commission process has been threatened on more than one occasion; in particular, last June, when Col. Peter Brownback and Capt. Keith Allred, the judges in the first two cases following that of David Hicks -- of the Canadian Omar Khadr and the Yemeni Salim Hamdan -- shut down the whole process after they realized that the Military Commissions Act (the legislation that had revived the Commissions after the Supreme Court had ruled the whole process illegal in June 2006) had only authorized them to try "unlawful enemy combatants," whereas the tribunal process at Guantánamo, which, according to the terms of the MCA, had made them eligible for trial by Military Commission in the first place, had only found them to be "enemy combatants."

Although this disruption was dealt with when the administration cobbled together an appeal court to dismiss the judges' concerns, both Col. Brownback and Capt. Allred have since demonstrated that, although the Commissions themselves may be nothing more than show trials ("We can't have acquittals," was how the Department of Defense's chief counsel William J. Haynes II, put it), the judges themselves were not prepared to be either ciphers or puppets, and were determined, instead, to do what judges are supposed to do, which is to assess the proceedings and the cases impartially.

Capt. Allred has featured more prominently in the media of late -- first by endorsing former chief prosecutor Col. Morris Davis' complaints about the unacceptable politicization of the Commissions process (complete with Haynes' "no acquittals" comments, and Col. Davis' disdain for the administration's insistence on introducing evidence obtained through torture), and then by delaying the start of Salim Hamdan's trial to allow time for the Supreme Court to deliver a long-awaited ruling on the prisoners' rights.

However, Col. Brownback also weighed in recently, threatening to delay the start of Omar Khadr's trial because of what he perceived as delaying tactics on the part of the prosecution (led by Maj. Jeffrey Groharing), who, he said, had failed to provide Khadr's lawyers with records of his interrogations at Guantánamo, despite repeated requests to do so. "I have been badgered, beaten and bruised by Maj. Groharing since the 7th of November to set a trial date," Col. Brownback exclaimed. "To get a trial date, I need to get discovery done."

While it's possible that Col. Brownback's sudden removal last Thursday as the judge in Omar Khadr's case can be explained because he had actually come out of retirement to serve as a Commission judge, and had reached the end of his required involvement, the timing has struck many observers -- myself included -- as more than a little suspicious, especially as the administration has refused to elaborate on the reasons for Col. Brownback's departure -- or dismissal. It remains to be seen whether any comment will eventually be forthcoming from Col. Brownback himself, or, indeed, whether his replacement, Col. Patrick Parrish, will be more inclined to do his job without raising uncomfortable questions along the way.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: mohammed al-qahtani, omar khadr, guantánamo, salim hamdan, supreme court, peter brownback, keith allred, military commissions, ghassan al-sharbi, jabran al-qahtani, sufyian barhoumi, abu zubaydah, binyam mohamed, osama bin laden, william j. haynes, morris davis, war on terror

Andy Worthington is a writer and historian, and author of The Guantánamo Files.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The October Surprise Comes Early
Posted by: JSquercia on Jun 3, 2008 12:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suddenly we have a RUSH to judgement which just so happens to guarantee the trials will be in full swing IMMEDIATELY prior to the ELECTION .
There is NOTHING too Low for this Administration to stoop to . Let's not forget when one of the attorney's suggested that acquitals might be good citing the Nuremberg trials as precedent he was told we can't have acquitals

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nuremberg revisted?...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Jun 4, 2008 8:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... but who is really on trial here?

This is just going to be a warm up to the real thing thats going to be
revisiting this administration BIG TIME time next year in the Hague!

Its so sad that the real monsters responsible for 9-11 were denied habeas corpus rights and
treated as enemy combatants from the get go and not as the criminals that they actually are,
just like Timothy McVeigh!

Treating the 9-11 monsters the same as they treated us just made us... THEM...
and now they [the real monsters] have the sympathy and US, we're the victimizers?
Just how and when did that happen?...
and who is responsible for this?

Only Bush43 could pull that disaster out from his Stetson!
This leader of the Fee-world was a one man disaster from the moment he took office...
a Psycho schematic Retard... idiot... and/or moron!

and he was elected to office not once... BUT TWICE!
which makes the entire US electorate retards/idiots/morons times two!


and if you refuse to allow the prosecution of this War Criminal, plus his accomplishers
you will have no real friends anywhere, anymore!

so... chew on that fat and contemplate the real meaning of these Tribunals this election cycle!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]