Source:
NYT/APBy THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 5, 2007
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) -- A second Army officer who sat on the ''enemy combatant'' tribunals at Guantanamo has come forward to criticize the panels, saying in court papers released Friday the rules favored the government and some decisions were reversed by commanders. The criticism, in an affidavit filed by attorneys for a Sudanese detainee, echo some charges made in June by Army Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, the first insider to publicly fault the proceedings.
At issue are the Combatant Status Review Tribunals, which the military held for 558 detainees at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay in 2004 and 2005, with handcuffed detainees appearing before panels made up of three officers. Detainees had a military ''personal representative'' instead of a defense attorney, and all but 38 were determined to be ''enemy combatants'' who could be held indefinitely without charges.
In the new affidavit, an Army officer whose name is redacted from a version provided to The Associated Press, says panels relied on insufficient evidence. He also said in six cases the panels unanimously declared the detainee was not an enemy combatant -- but commanders ordered new hearings and the finding was reversed without sufficient new evidence....
***
The officer is an Army reservist who has also worked as a criminal prosecutor as a civilian. He said he participated in 49 of the CSRT panels and that ''training was minimal'' and ''the process was not well defined.''
In his panels, the only witnesses who testified on behalf of detainees were other prisoners at the camp. There was no exculpatory evidence presented separately, as required by the rules, but some times it emerged accidentally because contradictory evidence would be presented....
Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Guantanamo-Tribunals.html