EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- After Boston, Eyes-Wide Open Hope?
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
Popular content
Today's Top News
US May Revive Guantánamo Military Courts
The Obama administration is moving toward reviving the military commission system for prosecuting Guantánamo detainees, which was a target of critics during the Bush administration, including Mr. Obama himself.
A US flag flies at Camp Justice, the location of the US Military Commissions court for war crimes at the US Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay. The administration of President Barack Obama is moving toward reviving the military commission system for prosecuting terrorism suspect held at Guantanamo Bay, The New York Times reported.
(AFP/Pool/File/Brennan Linsley) Officials said the first public moves could come as soon as next week, perhaps in filings to military judges at the United States naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, outlining an administration plan to amend the Bush administration's system to provide more legal protections for terrorism suspects.
Continuing the military commissions in any form would probably prompt sharp criticism from human rights groups as well as some of Mr. Obama's political allies because the troubled system became an emblem of the effort to use Guantánamo to avoid the American legal system.
Officials who work on the Guantánamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts. Judges might make it difficult to prosecute detainees who were subjected to brutal treatment or for prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies.
Obama administration officials - and Mr. Obama himself - have said in the past that they were not ruling out prosecutions in the military commission system. But senior officials have emphasized that they prefer to prosecute terrorism suspects in existing American courts. When President Obama suspended Guantánamo cases after his inauguration on Jan. 20, many participants said the military commission system appeared dead.
But in recent days a variety of officials involved in the deliberations say that after administration lawyers examined many of the cases, the mood shifted toward using military commissions to prosecute some detainees, perhaps including those charged with coordinating the Sept. 11 attacks.
"The more they look at it," said one official, "the more commissions don't look as bad as they did on Jan. 20."
Several officials insisted on anonymity because the administration has directed that no one publicly discuss the deliberations.
Administration officials said Friday that some detainees would be prosecuted in federal courts and noted that Mr. Obama had always left open the possibility of using military commissions.
Still, during the presidential campaign Mr. Obama criticized the commissions, saying that "by any measure our system of trying detainees has been an enormous failure," and declaring that as president he would "reject the Military Commissions Act."
The military commissions, which were established specifically for trying Guantánamo detainees, have been subject to repeated delays and court challenges that argued that detainees were being denied basic rights of American law. Only two trials have been completed in the nearly eight years since the Bush administration announced that it would use military tribunals.
Any plan to adjust the military commissions would walk a tightrope of granting the suspects more rights yet stopping short of affording them the rights available to defendants in American courts. Several lawyers say the commissions are only beneficial for the government if they make it easier to win a prosecution than it would be in federal court.
The Bush administration's commission system was criticized in part because it permitted evidence that would often be barred in federal court, like evidence obtained through coercive interrogations and hearsay.
The administration is likely to make it more difficult for prosecutors to admit hearsay, while not excluding it entirely, the lawyers said. The hearsay issue is central to many Guantánamo cases because they are based on intelligence reports and detainees may never be permitted to cross-examine the sources of those reports.
Human rights groups said Friday that using any form of military commission would be seen as permitting shortcuts that would not be available in existing American courts.
Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said that Mr. Obama had pledged to return the country to the rule of law and that "continuing with the military commission system would be a retreat from that promise."
Gabor Rona, the international legal director of Human Rights First, said military commissions would only be necessary if the administration wanted to assure convictions that might not otherwise be certain.
"The administration is making a huge mistake," Mr. Rona said, "if they believe getting convictions through suspect methods is more valuable than letting justice take its course."
It is not clear how many of the remaining 241 detainees are likely to be prosecuted. The four-month suspension of military commission proceedings Mr. Obama ordered is to end May 20. As a result, administration officials are considering whether to ask military judges at Guantánamo for an additional delay. In making such a request, administration lawyers might outline their proposed changes.
In recent days, senior administration officials have hinted publicly that commissions were far from dead, yet offered no specifics and their comments drew little attention. In Congressional testimony on Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said, "The commissions are still very much on the table."
In a news conference this week, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. emphasized that if the administration did use military commissions, the rules must give detainees "a maximum amount of due process."
But, speaking of detainees whom American officials have accused of involvement in major terrorist plots, Mr. Holder added, "It may be difficult for some of those high-value detainees to be tried in a normal federal court."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

19 Comments so far
Show AllThe stench of hypocrisy.
Maybe it's not hypocrisy at all, maybe it's just an admission of reality: in the U.S., we now have two separate systems of "justice," and that's fine with Obama, whom I regret to say I voted for and even contributed to.
This is admitting that there is one system for the well-connected, who can get away with mass murder, torture, spying, treason, the works, and there is another system, under which people can be locked up for life on hearsay or confessions elicited by torture, for the rest of us.
Can you point to one or two reasons you voted for Mr. Obama. I have been negatively critical of many people who say now that they voted for Mr. Obama, but I have yet to have any who have admitted to that act to explain why.
Many of us here believed Mr. Obama was not a good choice because of his stated policies, like increasing the military presents in Pakistan/Afghanistan. His demeanor seemed phony, too.
Why did you feel compelled to vote for him, if I may ask?
It is hypocrisy no matter how you look at it. The U.S. declares Cuba a human rights abusing torture state. But in fact who is massively abusing human rights and been accused of torture in Cuba? A lawless, human rights abusing torture state known as the U.S. The United States of America is a disgrace.
As a highly placed source, who refused to be identified, said, "Changes? Changes? We're in! We don't got to show you no stinkin' changes."
"prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies."
Isn't that giving Court approval to gossip?
Look at how accurate the Maryland records on climate activists were.
If they are interested in the truth, they will find out that most are imprisoned on the word of an informant!
If there was real justice being done, they would put on trial the ones responsible for trumping up the false evidence!
We cannot have the PERCEPTION that the USofA did anything wrong and so justice is denied and delayed and yes we have a government that speaks with forked tongue.It is like being in a vahicle that is heading to a cliff and you keep telling the driver to watch it and he tells you that you don't have the knowledge to do what he is doing and so don't bother him.Disgusting and deadly.Tony
Is Obomba just a Bush of another color?
Officials: Gitmo court system likely to stay open
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration may revamp and restart the Bush-era military trial system ...
I thought we got rid of that sadistic liar - I guess not.
0 promised change.
he changed his mind.
But wait a minute! The loudest "progressives" have been breathlessly repeating the mantra that Obama has ALREADY CLOSED Guantanamo (facts be damned).
So is the Iraq War not really over?
Do I not have the universal health care I thought I did?
Is torture not really banned?
Spying?
Extraordinary rendition?
State secrets?
Habeous Corpus? Bagram air base?
Well, I'm going to hope that reality is different than what it is. Because how dare anyone say that Obama supports the same policies as Bush. That's absurd! And possibly racist...
A lie is a lie painted in colorful language to lull the most concerned with moving on. Vendetta.
We're probably going to reinstate military commissions. The White House is downplaying elimination of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. NSA is still illegally spying on American citizens. The government is still maintaining that detainees at Bagram shouldn't have constitutional or Geneva Conventions rights. The State Secrets Doctrine is still in use. Torturers and murderers are praised as dedicated public servants acting in good faith, promised immunity, kept in positions of public trust and great power over life and death, maintained on the government payroll and anticipating federal retirement benefits. We've already decided to maintain permanent occupation of Iraq, and we're ramping up the war in Afghanistan while destabilizing nuclear-armed Pakistan. Change we can believe in? Yeah, right.
It is curious that the public is not enraged?
I guess the "Hopium" (Hope + Opium) has not worn off.
"the mood shifted toward using military commissions to prosecute some detainees, perhaps including those charged with coordinating the Sept. 11 attacks"
ok......where in theee hell is UBL?? the purported master mind of the attacks...or was that KSM?? I got confused after the 5th or 6th #2 alkayduh guy was apprehended....
secondly...where is the accountability for those responsible for the biggest intelligence failure in history??? oh yeah, I remember hearing something about everyone's at fault so no-ones at fault......
meanwhile,so quiet over in Saudi......
~ Some people live their whole lives without ever waking up ~
Isnt Obama supposed to close it ? Wasnt one of his claims and thats why the world looked at him in a different way ? It seems "ALL" politics cant do what they claim.
Sports betting picks
I don't believe this is accurate and would appreciate your checking on your sources. Be careful because neocon Republicans would love to infiltrate and create havoc here!
Do remember that the NY Times is a vested corporate outlet with defined self interests and not always a credible source!