Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who frequently appears on MSNBC, responded:Â
Obama broke the detainees into five categories. He is to be commended for deciding to send some detainees to federal court for a true and legitimate trial. However, he still refused to take the rule of law to its full conclusion. With one category, he isolated to "detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted, yet who pose a clear danger to the American people. He promised "[w]e are not going to release anyone if it would endanger our national security, nor will we release detainees within the United States who endanger the American people. Of course, this would mean holding people in violation of domestic and international law precisely what George Bush did. It is part of the Administration s effort to appear principled by doing an unprincipled thing. The reason that we cannot try these individuals is because they would win. The solution, according to both Bush and Obama, is not to give them a trial.
Most recently, a judge ordered the release of Mohammed Jawad, a boy who was most likely captured in Afghanistan in 2003 when he was twelve. A federal judge and military judge have found the case that Jawad is guilty inadequate especially since Jawad has been threatened, beaten, and tortured while in detention.Â
In July of 2008, this courtroom-within-a-prison complex idea was part of the recommendation of a Center for American Progress report titled, "How to Close Gitmo." It recommended this five phase plan.
Phase One: Immediately change the dynamic at Guantà namo by announcing a hard 18-month timetable to close the prison, and for the remainder of its existence, making it as transparent as possible. These are meaningful actions that signal real change from the Bush administration, yet allow appropriate time to work through all the challenges of getting the Guantà namo population down to zero.
Phase Two: Bring a small number of detainees into the United States to stand trial in regular federal or military courts. Scrapping the flawed Military Commissions and rejecting any effort to establish National Security Courts in favor of established U.S. courts will get trials moving faster and is a major step to restore confidence in the legitimacy of America s actions.
Phase Three: Create a resettlement and rehabilitation program in partnership with allied countries and international organizations to find homes for detainees that can t be returned to their home countries and to smooth the re-integration of detainees into society. This program should be based on similar programs currently used by the U.S. military in Iraq and the Saudi Arabian government to assist in the transition of militants from detention to release.
Phase Four: After U.S. courts demonstrate their effectiveness and legitimacy, transfer those remaining detainees selected to stand trial into the United States. These detainees should be held at either the U.S. Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility, also known as the "Supermax, at Florence, Colorado, or at the U.S. Military Detention Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, depending on whether they are slated for trial in federal or military courts.
Phase Five: Some detainees will remain at Guantà namo who are not candidates for trial, but who were captured during military operations in Afghanistan and may represent a threat to coalition forces still fighting in that country if they are released. Transfer this group back to Afghanistan and hold them in a NATO-controlled detention program along with prisoners captured by coalition forces during ongoing military operations.
This program can reduce the population of Guantà namo to zero within 18 months, but problems could arise in one or more of the steps, and the next administration should be prepared for the only two choices available for any remaining detainees: create a preventive detention regime and hold them indefinitely in the United States, or release them.[emphasis added]
I think this report has played a huge role in Obama's decision-making process up to this point. John Podesta, the CEO of the Center for American Progress, was in charge of Obama's transition team.Â
Obama is straddling the middle, as he often does, seeking to reconcile pro-torture, pro-war on terror, super Homeland Security industrial complex advocates with civil liberties lawyers and progressives and concerned Americans troubled by how the U.S. has circumvented the rule of law and how military and intelligence agencies have brutalized detainees at Gitmo.
Obama refuses to confront the fact that few of the detainees at Gitmo are guilty or that few even have played a role opposing the U.S. in the "war on terror. He refuses to educate a public who have learned to accept lawlessness as a necessity so they can be safe and secure (indeed, a Pew Research poll found 54% of white non-Hispanic Catholics, white evangelicals, and white mainline Protestants polled thought torture could be "justified. )
Couple the administration s refusal to oppose policies of indefinite detention with the administration s blocking and hindering of investigations of war crimes and one could argue this administration has as much contempt for the rule of law as Bush had.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
