Supreme court rejects Bush terror powers

[Melo 1]

Supreme court rejects Bush terror powers

· Military tribunals and rendition ruled illegal

· Defiant president to seek support from congress

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington

Friday June 30, 2006

The Guardian

The US supreme court yesterday rolled back the sweeping powers appropriated by the Bush administration in the war on terror, ruling it could not order military trials for Guantánamo detainees without the protections of the Geneva convention and American law. The 5-3 decision in the case brought by Salim Ahmed Hamden, Osama bin Laden's driver, was seen as a rejection of the central premise that Mr Bush, as wartime president, has legal authority that exceeds the powers of international treaties, US courts, and Congress.

In compelling the administration to comply with the Geneva convention at its war crimes trials, the court also implicitly outlawed some of the other controversial practices in the war on terror, such as torture and rendition, lawyers for the 460 detainees at Guantánamo said.

Some lawyers said the ruling places limits in other arenas of the war on terror, such as Mr Bush's order authorising the National Security Agency to monitor the email and telephone calls of Americans without court oversight. The lawyers said the direction from the court for the Bush administration to comply with Geneva convention safeguards for humane treatment would apply not only to Guantánamo, but the dozens of US detention centres around the world.

The court also reaffirmed the rights of hundreds of inmates, held without charge at Guantánamo for four years, to challenge the legality of their detention in US courts.

Lawyers for the detainees were delighted. "What this says is that the administration can no longer simply decide arbitrarily what it wants to do with people," said Michael Ratner, president of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which represents about 200 of the men at Guantánamo. But there was no indication that the blow to the White House vision of overarching executive power would hasten the end of a detention regime that has become a symbol of abuse in the war on terror - despite Mr Bush's comments that he would like to close Guantánamo.

Minutes after the ruling the president said he would seek legislation explicitly authorising the tribunals. "To the extent that there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court, we will do so," he told a press conference.

Justice department officials argued the court had pointed the way out of the legal morass by noting that Congress could pass laws specifically authorising military tribunals. "Nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in his opinion.

But the decision does drastically curtail the powers claimed by this White House to override international human rights treaties as well as US military law.

Hamdan, a Yemeni arrested by Afghan forces in 2001, has been at Guantánamo since 2002. He was among the first inmates designated for trial before a military commission, on a charge of conspiracy to commit war crimes. His lawyers had argued that the tribunals, as established by a presidential order, violated legal norms. Yesterday, the justices agreed.

"We conclude that the military commission convened to try Hamdan lacks power to proceed because its structure and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva conventions," said Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the majority decision. He went on: "It is not evident why the danger posed by international terrorism, considerable though it is, should require, in the case of Hamdan's trial, any variance from the courts-martial rules."

The sweep of the decision came as a surprise both to administration officials and to the detainees' lawyers, who said they were delighted with the outcome. "If the Geneva convention applies to this man, then the whole CIA programme of rendition is illegal," said Zachary Katznelson, senior counsel at Reprieve, which represents 36 detainees at Guantánamo "What they are saying is anyone picked up in the war on terror needs to be treated according to the Geneva convention."

Mr Bush established military tribunals by an executive order in 2001, which said it would be "not practicable" to apply the rules of law governing US courts.

Suspects brought before military tribunals have no right to a lawyer, or even to see all the evidence against them, and they are liable to the death penalty even in cases of a split decision. So far only 14 inmates of Guantánamo - including Salim Ahmed Hamdan - have been brought before military tribunals.

Backstory

759 detainees have been held in Guantánamo since the US began using the camp in January 2002.

10 have been charged before US military war crimes tribunals for conspiring with al-Qaida.

Officially there have been 41 suicide attempts by 25 detainees since January 2002. Defence lawyers believe the number to be much higher.

18 inmates are on hunger strike, down from a total of 131.

55% of detainees have not engaged in any hostile act against the US or its allies.

60% are "associated with", 30% are "members of", 8% "fighters for" and 2% have no identified connection to a terrorist group.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story...1809516,00.html

[Alex+R 0]

I really enjoyed listening to Bush on NPR today during his press conference, after he took the Japanese prime minister on a field trip to Graceland.

Journalist: please tell us more about (Guantamo ruling), blablabla [specific question].

Bush: I only know the broad strokes. Nobody told me what to say yet. [ winnig frat boy chuckle]

Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

Sometimes I'm just proud of my citizenship. The Greek one, that is.