| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| ACLU Condemns Indefinite Guantanamo detention |
| 2010-01-23 |
| The American Civil Liberties Union has criticised a recommendation that 47 Guantanamo Bay inmates should be held indefinitely without trial. Justice department officials said the men were too dangerous to release, but could not be tried as evidence against them would not stand up in a US court. Maybe a civilian court is the wrong place for them? ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said their detention would reduce the camp's closure to a "symbolic gesture". The White House said the president did not have to accept the recommendation. It came as the deadline President Barack Obama had set himself on his second day in office for closing the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay passed. I read he now wants to close it this year... Earlier on Friday, officials said a task force led by the justice department had recommended that while 35 detainees could be prosecuted through trials or military tribunals, 110 could be released either now or at a later date. The other 47 detainees were considered too dangerous to release, but could not be tried because the evidence against them was too flimsy or was extracted from them by coercion, so would not hold up in court, it concluded. In a statement, the ACLU said it disputed that any "If there is credible evidence that these prisoners are dangerous, there is no reason why that evidence could not be introduced against them in criminal trials," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security Project. "The criminal laws, and the material support laws in particular, are broad enough to reach anyone who presents a serious threat, and the federal courts are fully capable of affording defendants fair trials while protecting the government's legitimate interest in protecting information that is properly classified." Mr Jaffer said evidence that had been "tainted" according to the task force's recommendation, was "not evidence at all". The US justice system, he added, "excludes coerced evidence not only because coercion and torture are illegal, but because coerced evidence is unreliable". Nice bit of legalistic footwork. "Just as important as closing the prison quickly is closing it right, and that means putting an end to the illegal policy of indefinite detention without charge or trial," said Mr Romero. |
| Posted by:Free Radical |
| #9 America condemns ACLU's incessant whining. |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2010-01-23 17:06 |
| #8 Muzz meat may not be halal for sharks... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2010-01-23 12:53 |
| #7 Take the prisoners down to the shore at Gitmo. Point them in the direction of home. (Or Mecca, if they prefer.) Wish them good luck. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2010-01-23 12:38 |
| #6 We'll send 'em back when the war is over. In a ziploc bag, please... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2010-01-23 11:54 |
| #5 It's not indefinite. We'll send 'em back when the war is over. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2010-01-23 11:53 |
| #4 ACLU Challenge. ACLU members and their family must travel to one of two countries that has been targeted by terrorists for 20 years. Country A has the military tribunal approach to terrorist interrogations and country B has the ACLU/Holder Marandizing approach. Please pick the country to travel to. No, No ACLU , no discussion, just select A or B. If you start to argue and not answer, then your honesty is in question. |
| Posted by: HammerHead 2010-01-23 11:38 |
| #3 Notice the name of the director of the ACLU National Security Project - Jameel Jaffer. Normally my response to this kind of thing would be "Fine, we'll release them into your back yard!" But in this case, that may be just what they want. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-01-23 10:16 |
| #2 |
| Posted by: Albert Ebbager8936 2010-01-23 09:37 |
| #1 Notice the name of the director of the ACLU National Security Project - Jameel Jaffer. Not your typical Amish person, I'll venture. Might even be a cousin to a detainee? |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-01-23 09:00 |