You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front
Bush aids Blair by halting trial of Britons in Guantanamo Bay
2003-07-19
Legal proceedings against the two Britons facing a military trial in Guantanamo Bay were suspended last night to allow talks between British and US legal officials. In a minor concession to Tony Blair, who is facing a growing row at home on the issue, George Bush personally authorised the temporary halt to proceedings. His move paved the way for Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, to fly to Washington next week for talks with US officials.
If it’s minor, then we should be happy to help Tony. We sure don’t want any other Labour pol in charge.
Downing Street refused to comment on the likely out come. But officials are hoping that the Americans will observe what the prime minister has called "proper canons of law". Mr Bush, who has branded the two Britons "bad men", agreed to the concession over dinner with Mr Blair in the White House on Thursday.
Thus demonstrating anew the ’special relationship.’
The prime minister’s official spokesman, speaking at the end of Mr Blair’s overnight flight to Tokyo, said: "Legal proceedings against individuals have been suspended pending discussions next week between high-level legal teams in the United States. The UK side will be led by the attorney general." He added that proceedings against nine Britons at Guantanamo Bay would be suspended. "The president listened to the concerns raised by the prime minister." The concession will ease the pressure on Mr Blair, who is facing a cross-party campaign on behalf of Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi, who are facing secret military trials which could lead to the death penalty. The other Britons being held at Guantanamo Bay are not facing the immediate prospect of a trial.
Give us time.
While Downing Street welcomed the move, it is unlikely to ease the pressure on the families of the men, who still fear the worst. It is understood that of the three options open to US officials they are likely to agree to only the mildest of concessions. The options are:
  • Repatriating the two men to face trial in Britain. This is seen as highly unlikely because Britons can only be tried at home for a handful of offences committed abroad, which do not apply here;
  • Sending the two men for an open trial on the US mainland in the same way as the Taliban supporter John Walker Lindh, who escaped Guantanamo Bay because he comes from California;
    Thus the difference: Johnny Red was a citizen so he’s treated as one. But given recent developments in the mainland trials, we aren’t likely to send these jokers to a US magistrate.
  • Agreeing to open up the legal proceedings against the two Britons in Guantanamo Bay, making it easier for them to appoint defence lawyers and lifting the threat of the death penalty.
    The former is easy — let the Brits appoint counsel from their own military legal staff.
Although Washington is only likely to offer mild concessions, Downing Street is privately pleased because Mr Bush’s decision shows Mr Blair is able to wield influence in the White House. Labour critics of the war against Iraq regard the fate of the two Britons as a touchstone issue which will show whether the prime minister is a poodle of Mr Bush or an ally who can persuade the president to change his mind. As the two leaders prepared to go into dinner at the White House on Thursday night, Mr Blair’s case was not helped when Mr Bush condemned Mr Begg and Mr Abbasi. Standing next to the prime minister in the White House, the president said: "These were illegal combatants. They were picked out off the battlefield, aliens aiding and abetting the Taliban."
There were others, just like them, who're dead, thanks to Hassan Butt and a few others like him...
More than 200 MPs from across the Commons have signed a motion condemning the treatment of the two men, who have been held incommunicado for 18 months. If they plead not guilty, they could risk the death penalty for alleged terrorist offences. Under the current rules of the tribunal the US defence department would control the judge and the prosecution. The men would technically be entitled to appoint their defence lawyers, but these would have to undergo a Pentagon vetting procedure.
We could allow the Brits to vet the defense counsel, so long as a few key points are honored. That would be another minor concession we could safely do.
Posted by:Steve White

#3  Cut a deal with the Afghans and send them there for a trial. That's where they were caught. That should make them very happy.
Posted by: Michael   2003-7-19 9:26:20 PM  

#2  A couple of heavyweight items to consider here... Blair's ass (if it can be saved) and, of course, setting a bad precedent - which might have some legal consequences. Tough call.

I still like a suggestion someone else proferred earlier - let Britain send an attorney or two. I would add some limits... They could consult with the appointed tribunal attorney, but not be present in the hearings. And I don't favor letting them have transcripts or recordings either - they'd end up in a BBC hatchet job special.
Posted by: PD   2003-7-19 2:59:43 PM  

#1  The Brits that are making the most noise about the Brit Jihadis we netted in Afghanstan are just using the Jihadis as a dagger to stab Tony and the WOT policies of the govt. If we can make minor concessions to help Blair, so be it. We cannot let these scum go, or we are playing into the hands of the left, whatever side of the ocean the bitching comes from.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2003-7-19 12:14:27 PM  

00:00