| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front |
| Blair accepts military trial for Britons |
| 2003-07-21 |
| Tony Blair indicated yesterday that two of the British men being detained at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba will still stand trial before a US military court because national security would be at risk if they were returned to Britain. That’s why they were jugged in the first place. With the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, expected to start talks today in Washington about the fate of the two men, Mr Blair hinted that their best hope would be a slight loosening of the military tribunal’s rules. Meanwhile, Clive Stafford Smith, a lawyer who has represented the British inmates at American hearings, said he had been told by US government sources that a deal had been done before Lord Goldsmith even arrived in the country. The only significant concession would be to lift the threat of the death penalty. Jugged for life at Gitmo? I can go with that. The news will infuriate supporters of Moazzem Begg and Feroz Abbasi, whose hopes were raised last week when George Bush authorised a temporary halt in the legal proceedings to allow Lord Goldsmith to travel to the talks. Speaking to Sky television during his trip to the far east, Mr Blair hinted that President Bush had handed him intelligence warning of the dangers of returning the men to Britain, where they would almost certainly be set free. "We have got to look at a whole range of considerations, not least our own national security," he said. His remarks show he has been persuaded by US concern that Mr Begg and Mr Abbasi would be free to return to Pakistan if they were repatriated because legal experts do not believe they could be charged with any offence in Britain. They’d return to Pakland with rose petals at their feet, and we’d spend lots of time and effort to nail them again somewhere in Afghanistan, or worse. In his first public comment about the men since a White House dinner with Mr Bush on Thursday, Mr Blair indicated that he now supported a military trial as he called on people to give the US credit for the tribunal. "Any military commission that [the Americans] have is subject to rules that I think would be regarded as reasonably strict by anyone." But he said the Americans would have to go some way to observing legal norms. "Obviously if we have our own nationals tried in that way we would want to make sure that every single aspect of this was consistent with the proper rules." Britain has expressed "strong reservations" about the trial, which would be conducted by a military judge and prosecution. The men would be entitled to appoint their own defence team but the lawyers would have to pass a strict vetting procedure, for which the lawyers themselves would have to pay. Let George Galloway pay for it -- doesn’t he have a fund for this sort of thing? The prosecution would be able to present as evidence testimony gained under duress and unsworn statements, and the tribunal has the power to impose the death penalty. Mr Blair’s remarks indicate that President Bush has agreed to loosen the rules, but a normal criminal trial on the mainland, along the lines of the trial of the Californian supporter of the Taliban, John Walker Lindh, has been ruled out. Mr Blair qualified his remarks by saying that Lord Goldsmith would discuss two options in Washington - repatriating the two men to face trial in Britain or amending the rules of the US tribunal to bring them more into line with the British legal system. But Mr Blair’s warning about national security, and his praise for the "strict" rules governing the tribunal, indicated that he is prepared to face down a row by agreeing to a trial at Guantanamo Bay. "Unfortunately, I am informed by the Americans that the "I understand that the only concession that President Bush will make is that the British will not be subject to the death penalty. Again, this would be no concession at all, since there is no evidence to date that our citizens committed any act that would justify a death sentence." Other than toting a rifle in a combat zone while participating as an irregular, you mean. The men’s supporters are likely to be angered that Mr Blair came close to endorsing Mr Bush’s description of the two as "bad men". Mr Blair told Sky: "These cases all arise out the situation in Afghanistan where people were supporting al-Qaida, the terrorist network and the Taliban against British and American forces ... it is just worth pointing out that this came out of a situation of huge danger for ourselves and our armed forces." Asked whether he agreed with Mr Bush’s controversial remarks, Mr Blair said: "I think what he was meaning by that was the situation in terms of people going over and supporting al-Qaida and the Taliban ... some of the discussion of this in the past few weeks has rather forgotten the context in which this arose." Funny how that happened! |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #7 This is where the rubber meets the road. Either you mean what you say, or not. If you mean it as long as it has no cost to you, such as your countrymen facing what sounded really good 5 minutes ago for everyone else, then you don't mean it and your word is shit. Blair is the real deal - Kudos to him. If he ever seeks asylum he'll be welcome in the US of A. |
| Posted by: PD 2003-7-21 9:22:47 PM |
| #6 POMEs: Prisoners Of Mother England |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2003-7-21 6:38:22 PM |
| #5 Brits, Aris |
| Posted by: Not Mike Moore 2003-7-21 5:49:07 PM |
| #4 short for pommy bastards... |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-7-21 3:06:27 PM |
| #3 "poms"? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2003-7-21 1:39:45 PM |
| #2 The only significant concession would be to lift the threat of the death penalty. As much as I like the Poms, I don't particularly care for their aversion to the death penalty. These guys got caught by U.S. forces, and as such, are U.S. prisoners and are subject to legal proceedings by the U.S. government. It's just like that kid that was caught in Singapore vandalizing cars; some people here complained that caning was a harsh penalty for what he did. The fact of the matter is, his actions came under the jurisdiction of Singaporean law, and he had to live with the consequences of his actions. However, in light of the probability that the death penalty won't be imposed in the event that these Pom terrorists are convicted, they can then serve out their sentences somewhere else besides within U.S. territory. Someone has to feed them, and it doesn't need to be us. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-7-21 11:07:04 AM |
| #1 A cheap and easy solution would be to wait until we had a raid/arrests based on other intel, then publicly thank these two asshats for their assistance and cooperation and release them. Let their cohorts kill them for us |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-7-21 8:39:37 AM |