So in my post below I quote and discuss a good portion of the Military Commissions Act of 2006. It's pretty clear where it allows torture, and evidence gained through torture, to be admitted into the trial. It's also clear where the idea of search warrants gets thrown out the window.
On the other hand, I'm not a lawyer, so I might be missing some things. I don't see where (a) this is applicable to US citizens - specifically, that seems excluded by the following:" 948b - (a) Purpose - This chapter establishes procedures governing the use of military commissions to try alien unlawful enemy combatants engaged in hostilities against the United States for violations of the law of war and other offenses triable by military commission." or (b) habeas corpus gets revoked.
Can someone help?
Ed. I think I may have found the habeas corpus part. It's not in the MCA, specifically, but in what it excludes from the UCMJ.
(d) Inapplicability of Certain Provisions- (1) The following provisions of this title shall not apply to trial by military commission under this chapter:
"The accused shall be advised of the charges against him and of his right to be represented at that investigation as provided in section 838 of this title (article 38) and in regulations prescribed under that section. At that investigation full opportunity shall be given to the accused to cross-examine witnesses against him if they are available and to present anything he may desire in his own behalf, either in defense or mitigation, and the investigation officer shall examine available witnesses requested by the accused. If the charges are forwarded after the investigation, they shall be accompanied by a statement of the substance of the testimony taken on both sides and a copy thereof shall be given to the accused."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
of you have sat, and perhaps thought, with us!
9 comments:
I'm no lawyer either but the way I read 832. ART. 32 is that (f) applies to US citizens and others who are not defined as alien unlawful enemby combatants, and (g) is the exception for alien unlawful enemy combatants.
So US citizens have the rights afforded by Article III (with the new allowable methods of torture) but the "alien unlawful enemy combatants" have no rights under the Geneva Convention at all.
Again, that's my reading with only a few business law classes.
I'll take a look tonight, Doc
i'm not ned - 832 is part of the UCMJ, not the MCA.
Doc--on habeas corpus, look at Section 7 (p. 93 of your link)
Doc, I've got it.
In the definition of UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT, as "a person who has engaged in hostilities or WHO HAS PURPOSEFULLY AND MATERIALLY SUPPORTED HOSTILITIES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant, can apply to U.S. citizens. While the military tribunals cannot try citizens under this statute, the fear is that any such-designated "unlawful combatant" may be indefinitely "detained" without trial under the general Gitmo authority.
And also a "finding" by the preznit that someone IS an ALIEN unlawful combatant is conclusive and subject to almost no review, so it's "we don't need no stinking naturalization papers!" Citizenship means nothing in secret prisons if they say you're an alien.
Pete - wow, you'd think I would have caught the section entitled "Habeas Corpus Matters". I think the version I was reading (html, so I could cut and paste) didn't get to that part.
On the second point, though, it explicitly says - The term 'alien' means a person who is not a citizen of the United States.
Wouldn't that require the president to revoke citizenship, and is that possible?
Sorry, I missed the re-direct. :^(
Doc,
It isn't that the Naked Emperor could revoke citizenship. The problem would be a lack of standing to challenge the president's determination. Long shot, but those prisons are a long way away...
Post a Comment