Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Rights of Hundreds at Bagram Prison Still Denied
US Wary Over Granting Bagram Inmates' Rights
WASHINGTON - A US appeals court has appeared reluctant to grant detainees at the Bagram prison in Afghanistan the same rights given in 2008 to prisoners in Guantanamo to be able to challenge their detention in US civilian courts.
Watchtowers sit along the perimeter of Bagram prison, north of Kabul. (AFP/File/Massoud Hossaini) Judges here were wary of extending three detainees such rights at the military prison at the Bagram Air Base north of Kabul, indicating such a ruling could lead to other prisoners held oversees by the United States to seek redress in federal court.
In April last year, US District Judge John Bates recognized the right of the detainees, held at Bagram without charge for at least six years, to challenge their detention in the United States, according to their lawyers.
He based the ruling on the landmark Supreme Court move in 2008 to allow such rights to prisoners held at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
"These detainees have been denied a due process," insisted attorney Tina Foster on Thursday.
The three appeals court judges however expressed concern that an approval of Bates' ruling would open the door to more than 670 prisoners currently held at Bagram, and serve as precedent for other people detained in US military bases around the world.
The Bagram prison has served since 2002 as a holding site for terror suspects captured outside Afghanistan and Iraq.
In September, the United States granted Bagram prisoners the nominal right to challenge their detention, but not in US courts.
Bates originally ruled that foreign prisoners held at Bagram should also be provided the right enshrined in the writ of habeas corpus.
In responding, however, the administration has argued Bates's ruling "reverses long-standing law, imposes great practical problems, conflicts with the considered judgment of both political branches, and risks opening the federal courts to habeas claims brought by detainees held in other theaters of war during future military actions."
Many of the detainees at Bagram have languished for years.
But unlike prisoners at Guantanamo Bay -- where some 229 "war on terror" detainees are still held -- the Bagram inmates have had no access to lawyers, no right to hear the allegations against them and only rudimentary reviews of their status as "enemy combatants."
- Posted in
6 Comments so far
Show AllIt's nomination time again for the Noble Peace prize. How about another one for Obama. Perhaps this year, if a deserving candidate gets the prize, they will reject it on the basis of not wanting to be in the same Peace prize club as Obama.
I nominate Gen. Petraeus and Ehud Olmert.
As I continue to read something new almost everyday that indicates that The Law no longer applies internationally or nationally, and this dissing of The Law is by the very people who purport to lead us.
Given this STATE of affairs, why should any of us obey The Law anymore?
Why if its perfectly okay to murder innocent civilians everyday with our drone bomber attacks and our goon squads ready to hit even the most peaceful protestors over the head with their coward clubs, why shouldn't we open all the prison doors in this country and let everybody out and everyone else take up arms ... just in case?
Why if BIG BUSINESS MEN on Wall Street, in banks and investment houses and in our Treasury Department and in the Executive Branch, the Congress and the Courts can lie and cheat and play their games like a Big Casino and bankrupt the rest of us while they line their pockets, why can't we break The Law too?
Why should we put our lives on the line like good little toadies for human filth ... or should I say inhuman/inhumane filth, walking shells morally and spiritually bankrupt and full of Shit?
And those are genuine questions?
I know my answers, do you?
Six years?! It's hard to imagine being imprisoned, without charge or trial or conviction, for such a long time. You'd think that the US military or PTB would quickly seek conviction to show that they'd courageously apprehended some really bad dudes or something. One can only conclude that:
1. There is little evidence against the detainees;
2. The military et al want to throw their weight around, instill fear in the locals, etc.;
3. The detainees are not seen as equal humans who deserve fairness and justice.
most of these prisoners were picked by the thugs and dope dealers from the northern alliance; yeah, you know, the same ones who fought for the russians when the russains had the red rubles to buy them. now, they fight alongside us for our american dollars. always remember that we gave the northern alliance bounties to bring us prisoners, and we took their word that they were bringing in the truly bad guys. now, it looks like few, if any, of the folks whom the northern alliance boys dragged into our custody knew in advance about 9/11 or had anything more than an abstract hatred of america. however, we have made that hate real by supplying them with vendettas. amazing that we could detain and torture so many marginal players. now, they're so rightfully and righteously mad at us that we fear turning them loose. our actions truly turned a self-fulfiling prophecy.
Not only is the US at fault here but also these bunch of host/whored countries that allow the US to perpetrate these crimes on their soil.