Obama set to revive military commissions: Only "reliable" hearsay "evidence" will be permitted

[Better Believe It]

Obama set to revive military commissions
By Peter Finn
Washington Post
May 9, 2009

The Obama administration is preparing to revive the system of military commissions established at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under new rules that would offer terrorism suspects greater legal protections, government officials said.

The military commissions have allowed the trial of terrorism suspects in a setting that favors the government and protects classified information, but they were sharply criticized during the administration of President George W. Bush. "By any measure, our system of trying detainees has been an enormous failure," then-candidate Barack Obama said in June 2008.

"This is an extraordinary development, and it's going to tarnish the image of American justice again," said Tom Parker, a counterterrorism specialist at Amnesty International.

The Obama administration's plan to reinstate the commissions with modifications reflects the fear that some cases would fail in federal courts or in standard military legal settings.

Civil liberties advocates, who insist that federal courts can handle terrorism cases, vowed to challenge any new process.

"We'll litigate this before they can proceed, absolutely," said Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Any effort to tinker with military commissions would be an enormous mistake. There is no way to fix a flawed process that has not rendered justice."

Under the administration's rule changes, hearsay evidence would be admissible if a judge determines it is reliable, officials said.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30654216

- And would cross examination of those witnesses who provide so-called "hearsay evidence" be permitted? Sorry. If you don't have a case in federal court with a real judge and a real jury with real evidence you don't have a case! That's why we have a Constitution and a judicial system. -

[JackDragna]

1. Bloody kangaroo courts.

This is inexcusable. Completely, totally inexcusable.

[ShortnFiery]

8. DoublePlusLegal?!? Even beyond torture these Tribunals are a travesty of justice.

[villager]

2. More "spare change" we can believe in!

n/t

[nichomachus]

9. Hey,Mr. Obama, can you spare some "change?" n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Marvelous. And Who Will The Judges Be? K&R So Everyone Can See.

From the Judicial branch of our government? Or military?

[Better Believe It]

4. Mainly Republican appointed judges I bet!

[TacticalPeek]

5. Revolting.

K & R

:kick:

[rug]

6. Why should I read the actual article? Someone can just tell me about this bullshit.

[ShortnFiery]

7. I'm sickened by this news. :( nt

[Kaleva]

10. Hearsay evidence was allowed at Nuremberg

[Better Believe It]

11. So will obvious Nazi war criminals be put on trial by these military commissions?

I hadn't heard about that.

I thought it was alleged "terrorists" and so-called "enemy combatants" that are facing prosecution, not fascist war criminals.

Thanks for the info.

You're surely not comparing those who were tortured at Gitmo to the Nazi war criminals put on trial at Nuremberg .... are you?

[Kaleva]

12. A straw man

The discussion is about the military commissions using hearsay evidence. It's not about those who were tortured.

Not every high level Nazi was a war criminal nor was every high level Nazi charged with war crimes convicted of such.

[BzaDem]

13. So the standards of evidence should depend on whether YOU prejudge groups as innocent?

Hearsay is not allowed for terrorists, because you think they are less guilty than those at Nuremburg? But it is fine at Nuremburg, because they are fascist war criminals?

:wtf:

[Better Believe It]

15. Nuremberg War Crime Trials A Strawman and not a good analogy at all to what is being proposed.

I didn't suggest that the military commission "trials" prposed are just like the Nuremburg war crime trials rules of evidence.

But if you think that tortured Gitmo inmates should be given hard labor or perhaps even be executed based on hearsay and without real trials, that's your right.

What do you hate the rule of law?

[Kaleva]

28. Another strawman.

Again, the discussion is about the military commissions using hearsay evidence. It isn't about if I hate the rule of law.

[Better Believe It]

16. They had public testimony with cross examination of witnesses at Nuremburg.

Not secret testimony based upon hearsay.

And do you really think all of those held at Gitmo are terrorists just because the Bush government said so?

[rug]

29. So were the films, the photographs and the canisters.

[Teaser]

14. This thread is great for people who want to build their ignore lists

.

[masuki bance]

17. Why would somebody want to add people to their ignore list?

[Skwmom]

19. Because many people choose to live by the rule ignorance is bliss.

[flyarm]

21. and some people deplore truth!! sad but pretty true around here lately! eom

[flyarm]

23. Then I guess you will ignore Obama's own words, because this is what he said...

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/09/obama-to-git-mo-better-military-tribunals/#more-4091

Yes, the same Barack Obama that forcefully pronounced to the American public during the election:


By any measure our system of trying detainees has been an enormous failure,

Not to mention declaring that as President he would:


reject the Military Commissions Act.


funny, but what makes me think you have already ignored what he said ??????????

[Vidar]

25. Long enough now. Not adding to it here.

[Hippo_Tron]

18. People who fight against the United States in a combat context don't get tried in civilian courts

They never have and never will.

If they are apprehended by law enforcement they should be tried in a civilian court. If they are apprehended in a war zone by the military then they should be tried in military courts.

[Better Believe It]

26. The Bush government and Obama Adminstration are not treating them as POW's with

all of the guarantees and rights POW's are afforded under international law including Red Cross visits, a ban on torture and all the other rights provided in the Geneva Convention.

Labeling them "enemy combatant terrorists" is just a convenient way to evade international law.

[Hippo_Tron]

27. Well the Bush Government didn't, Obama hasn't been decisive about this yet

[flyarm]

20. "Not to mention declaring that as President he would:reject the Military Commissions Act."

Read more about it at Emptywheel!!

Obama To Git-Mo Better Military Tribunals
By: bmaz Saturday May 9, 2009 11:41 am


The GOP squeals and Obama greases their detainee wheel. On May 1st, the New York Times warned that President Obama was contemplating reinstating the tyrannical Bush/Cheney military tribunals for Gitmo detainees.

Yes, the same Barack Obama that forcefully pronounced to the American public during the election:


By any measure our system of trying detainees has been an enormous failure,

Not to mention declaring that as President he would:


reject the Military Commissions Act.

That was then, this is now. And now, today, it is seems nearly confirmed that military commissions will be back. From Peter Finn at the Washington Post:

The Obama administration is preparing to revive the system of military commissions established at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under new rules that would offer terrorism suspects greater legal protections, government officials said.

The rules would block the use of evidence obtained from coercive interrogations, tighten the admissibility of hearsay testimony and allow detainees greater freedom to choose their attorneys, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
...
Officials said yesterday that the Obama administration will seek a 90-day extension of the suspension as early as next week. It would subsequently restart the commissions on American soil, probably at military bases, according to a lawyer briefed on the plan.

To be clear, the Administration indicates that Obama has not given the final sign off on the plan, and the ACLU has already sworn to fight any such plan. One thing is for certain, however, Obama is not contemplating this move in order to give the detainees so tried the equivalent level of due process and justice that would be afforded by American courts, else he would simply use American courts as he stated was his intention while campaigning for votes.

[Clear Blue Sky]

22. I thought these commissions were ending.

[flyarm]

24. nahhhhhhhhh only kidding!!!..but watch out what you repeat you were told..

because you will go on someone's snit list of ignore!!

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...............

[LooseWilly]

30. Wouldn't want a court setting in which the US might lose a case.

It might mess up our resume.

Of course, this is probably largely in result of the fact that the Bushies did such unspeakably illegal shit that there's no way any of these detainees could be convicted by anything but a kangaroo court... and Obama is apparently unwilling to let a couple of potential terrorist back on the streets simply to re-establish US credentials as a nation of laws... world rep is apparently over rated.

Ahh well, only the left gives a shit... right? And it is the left's job to just STFU... so, well... I'll go pour myself another drink. And STFU already...

[Better Believe It]

33. Especially since some of these "enemy conbatants" are not terrorists!

The public must continue to be led to believe that the people rounded up are all a bunch of terrorists!

[dionysus]

31. you bitter believe it!!!!

[AngryAmish]

32. Hearsay is allowed all the time in real cases in Federal Court

I don't see why it would be any different with the tribunals.