J
Johnny
Guest
Guantanamo Military Lawyer Breaks Ranks to Condemn "Unconscionable"
Detention
By Leonard Doyle
The Independent UK
Saturday 27 October 2007
An American military lawyer and veteran of dozens of secret Guantanamo
tribunals has made a devastating attack on the legal process for determining
whether Guantanamo prisoners are "enemy combatants".
The whistleblower, an army major inside the military court system which the
United States has established at Guantanamo Bay, has described the detention
of one prisoner, a hospital administrator from Sudan, as "unconscionable".
His critique will be the centrepiece of a hearing on 5 December before the
US Supreme Court when another attempt is made to shut the prison down. So
nervous is the Bush administration of the latest attack - and another
Supreme Court ruling against it - that it is preparing a whole new system of
military courts to deal with those still imprisoned.
The whistleblower's testimony is the most serious attack to date on the
military panels, which were meant to give a fig- leaf of legitimacy to the
interrogation and detention policies at Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay. The
major has taken part in 49 status review panels.
"It's a kangaroo court system and completely corrupt," said Michael Ratner,
the president of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which is
co-ordinating investigations and appeals lawsuits against the government by
some 1,000 lawyers. "Stalin had show trials, but at Guantanamo they are not
even show trials because it all takes place in secret."
Combatant Status Review Tribunals were held for 558 detainees at the
Guantanamo in 2004 and 2005. All but 38 detainees were determined to be
"enemy combatants" who could be held indefinitely without charges. Detainees
were not represented by a lawyer and had no access to evidence. The only
witnesses they could call were other so-called "enemy combatants".
The army major has said that in the rare circumstances in which it was
decided that the detainees were no longer enemy combatants, senior
commanders ordered another panel to reverse the decision. The major also
described "acrimony" during a "heated conference" call from Admiral
McGarragh, who reports to the Secretary of the US Navy, when a the panel
refused to describe several Uighur detainees as enemy combatants. Senior
military commanders wanted to know why some panels considering the same
evidence would come to different findings on the Uighurs, members of a
Muslim minority in China.
When the whistleblower suggested over the phone that inconsistent results
were "good for the system ... and would show that the system was working
correctly", Admiral McGarragh, he said, had no response. The latest
criticism emerged when lawyers investigating the case of a Sudanese hospital
administrator, Adel Hamad, who has been held for five years, came across a
"stunning" sworn statement from a member of the military panel. The officer
they interviewed was so frightened of retaliation from the military that
they would not allow their name to be used in the statement, nor to reveal
whether the person was a man or woman.
Two other military lawyers have also gone public. In June, Army Lt-Col
Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran in US military intelligence, became the
first insider to publicly fault the proceedings. In May last year, Lt-Com
Matthew Diaz was sentenced to six months in prison and dismissed from the
military after he sent the names of all 551 men at the prison to a human
rights group.
William Teesdale, a British-born lawyer investigating Mr Hadad's case,
said he was certain of his client's innocence, having tracked down doctors
who worked with him at an Afghan hospital. "Mr Hamad is an innocent man, and
he is not the only one in Guantanamo."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3101949.ece
Detention
By Leonard Doyle
The Independent UK
Saturday 27 October 2007
An American military lawyer and veteran of dozens of secret Guantanamo
tribunals has made a devastating attack on the legal process for determining
whether Guantanamo prisoners are "enemy combatants".
The whistleblower, an army major inside the military court system which the
United States has established at Guantanamo Bay, has described the detention
of one prisoner, a hospital administrator from Sudan, as "unconscionable".
His critique will be the centrepiece of a hearing on 5 December before the
US Supreme Court when another attempt is made to shut the prison down. So
nervous is the Bush administration of the latest attack - and another
Supreme Court ruling against it - that it is preparing a whole new system of
military courts to deal with those still imprisoned.
The whistleblower's testimony is the most serious attack to date on the
military panels, which were meant to give a fig- leaf of legitimacy to the
interrogation and detention policies at Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay. The
major has taken part in 49 status review panels.
"It's a kangaroo court system and completely corrupt," said Michael Ratner,
the president of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which is
co-ordinating investigations and appeals lawsuits against the government by
some 1,000 lawyers. "Stalin had show trials, but at Guantanamo they are not
even show trials because it all takes place in secret."
Combatant Status Review Tribunals were held for 558 detainees at the
Guantanamo in 2004 and 2005. All but 38 detainees were determined to be
"enemy combatants" who could be held indefinitely without charges. Detainees
were not represented by a lawyer and had no access to evidence. The only
witnesses they could call were other so-called "enemy combatants".
The army major has said that in the rare circumstances in which it was
decided that the detainees were no longer enemy combatants, senior
commanders ordered another panel to reverse the decision. The major also
described "acrimony" during a "heated conference" call from Admiral
McGarragh, who reports to the Secretary of the US Navy, when a the panel
refused to describe several Uighur detainees as enemy combatants. Senior
military commanders wanted to know why some panels considering the same
evidence would come to different findings on the Uighurs, members of a
Muslim minority in China.
When the whistleblower suggested over the phone that inconsistent results
were "good for the system ... and would show that the system was working
correctly", Admiral McGarragh, he said, had no response. The latest
criticism emerged when lawyers investigating the case of a Sudanese hospital
administrator, Adel Hamad, who has been held for five years, came across a
"stunning" sworn statement from a member of the military panel. The officer
they interviewed was so frightened of retaliation from the military that
they would not allow their name to be used in the statement, nor to reveal
whether the person was a man or woman.
Two other military lawyers have also gone public. In June, Army Lt-Col
Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran in US military intelligence, became the
first insider to publicly fault the proceedings. In May last year, Lt-Com
Matthew Diaz was sentenced to six months in prison and dismissed from the
military after he sent the names of all 551 men at the prison to a human
rights group.
William Teesdale, a British-born lawyer investigating Mr Hadad's case,
said he was certain of his client's innocence, having tracked down doctors
who worked with him at an Afghan hospital. "Mr Hamad is an innocent man, and
he is not the only one in Guantanamo."
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3101949.ece
