Appeals Court Tackles Detainee's Trial Rights
Does an accused have a right to be present at their entire trial? They do in American courts. But maybe not at military tribunal trials at Guantanamo. The case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, allegedly a driver for Osama bin Laden, was heard today by the D.C. Court of Appeals.
The three-judge panel reacted strongly when a lawyer for Salim Ahmed Hamdan told them "it makes no sense to say that we adhere to international law and the first thing we do at the beginning of a trial is violate a canon of international law." Legal systems of other countries don't allow a defendant to be present for all parts of a trial, Appeals Judge A. Raymond Randolph replied. Judge John Roberts added that some countries don't allow cross-examination of witnesses.
"This is the law in Rwanda," but should not be in the United States, replied the detainee's lawyer, Charles Swift.
.....Now Hamdan would be barred from part of his trial, while the government presents classified evidence that only his attorneys would be allowed to see. The government says national security necessitates the step, leading to the judge's ruling that the Bush administration's military commissions are unlawful.
"The right to be present at all stages in criminal proceedings is fundamental, guaranteed by military law, common law, constitutional law and international law," Hamdan's attorneys say in an appeals court filing.
Hamdan has been charged with being a member of a conspiracy to "attack American civilians, acting as an illegal combatant, in violation of the traditional laws of war." His lawyers say:
Hamden's tribunal proceeding was underway last year when the Judge stopped it to determine whether Geneva Convention protections applied.“A driver, whether he is Hitler’s driver, Martha Stewart’s driver or any other driver, doesn’t necessarily have any knowledge of what’s going on. Driving Osama bin Laden around didn’t kill anybody. ... He has the great misfortune of having chosen a terrible employer, but that doesn’t make him a terrible person.”
[Judge] Robertson ordered the government to convene a tribunal of military officers to determine whether Hamdan is a prisoner of war, an illegal enemy combatant, or perhaps an innocent man with no role in al-Qaida. For the time being, Robertson said, Hamdan does get Geneva Convention protections.
The Government appealed the ruling, and now the Appeals court will decide. Eventually, the case may reach the Supreme Court.
| < Michael Jackson: Grandiose Witness Claims | On the Time Spent Blogging > |





