Bin Laden's driver denies chargesMr Hamdan has acknowledged working for Bin Laden in Afghanistan from 1997 to 2001 for $200 (£99) a month, but denies being part of al-Qaeda or taking part in any attacks.
His lawyers have tried to halt the trial on grounds of legality.
In June, the US Supreme Court ruled that detainees had to be able to challenge their detention in civilian courts.
But a judge ruled last week that the military tribunal could begin as scheduled on Monday without contradicting the Supreme Court.
Judge Clears Way for Trial of Bin Laden’s Driver Judge James Robertson, of the district court in Washington, ruled that Mr. Hamdan’s claims that the military commission he faces is unconstitutional can be appealed to a civilian court only after his military trial is completed.
The ruling clears the way for the start of the first trial of a detainee at the prison complex in Cuba, opened in 2002 to hold prisoners captured in the campaign against terrorism. The trials have been delayed for years, in part by courts that found legal fault with the commissions created to try people designated by the government as “unlawful enemy combatants.”
“Hamdan is to face a military commission designed by Congress under guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court,” the judge said.
Judge Robertson noted that his ruling applies only to the case of Mr. Hamdan and is not binding on the many other Guantánamo cases pending before other judges. He also did not rule on what he said was a central question, the constitutionality of a provision of the Military Commissions Act that permits only limited appeals by Guantánamo detainees to a single court, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The Case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan
Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni national, was captured by Afghan forces and handed over to the U.S. military in Afghanistan in late 2001. He has been held at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba since early 2002. Hamdan alleges that, while in U.S. custody, he was beaten, threatened and kept in isolation for upwards of eight months.
Hamdan is accused of serving as Osama bin Laden's bodyguard and personal driver. The government has also accused Hamdan of delivering weapons to al Qaeda members and purchasing vehicles for bin Laden's security detail.
On July 14, 2004, the Department of Defense formally referred charges against Hamdan for trial by military commission. Commission proceedings began in August 2004, and Hamdan was designated an "enemy combatant" by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal ("CSRT") on October 3, 2004.
Proceedings against Hamdan were abruptly halted, however, in November 2004 when a U.S. federal court in Washington, D.C. ruled the commissions unlawful. An appeals court reversed that finding, and Hamdan sought review from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Definition of Unlawful Enemy Combatant8.
What is the definition of “unlawful enemy combatant” under the MCA and how does it comport with international law?
The MCA expands the definition of “combatant” to include those who have “purposefully and materially” supported hostilities against the United States, even if they have not taken part in the hostilities themselves, and even if they are arrested far from the battlefield. This turns ordinary civilians – such as a mother giving food to her combatant son, an individual who sends money to a banned group, or a U.S. resident who commits a criminal act unrelated to armed conflict – into “combatants” who can be placed in military custody and hauled before a military commission.
An additional – and circular – provision specifies that anyone who has been determined to be an “unlawful enemy combatant” by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal (the military boards convened to allow detainees at Guantanamo Bay to contest their status as combatants, called CSRTs) or “another competent tribunal” established by the president or the defense secretary is presumed to be an enemy combatant for the purposes of military commissions. This provision does not include any substantive criteria to guide the deliberations of such tribunals. And, notably, the definition of enemy combatant that has been used by the CSRTs at Guantanamo is even broader than the definition contained in the legislation, encompassing even the unknowing financier of a charitable arm of a terrorist organization. In at least one known case, a CSRT labeled a detainee an enemy combatant for precisely that reason.1
These definitions have essentially been invented by the administration and Congress. They have no basis in international law and undermine one of the most fundamental pillars of the Geneva Conventions – the distinction between combatants, who engage in hostilities and are subject to attack, and non-combatants.
US acknowledges torture at Guantanamo; in Iraq, Afghanistan - UN Washington has, for the first time, acknowledged to the United Nations that prisoners have been tortured at US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq, a UN source said.
The acknowledgement was made in a report submitted to the UN Committee against Torture, said a member of the ten-person panel, speaking on on condition of anonymity.
'They are no longer trying to duck this and have respected their obligation to inform the UN,' the Committee member said.
UN sources said this is the first time the world body has received such a frank statement on torture from US authorities.
DetaineesWhat's unlawful about these enemy combatants?No Unlawful Enemy Combatants at GuantanamoSALIM AHMED HAMDAN,Plaintiff,v.DONALD H. RUMSFELD,Defendant.“It is not necessary to accept everything as true, one must only accept it as necessary.”
–The Trial by Franz Kafka
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
