Email-Us

ALHABTOOR INFORMATION AND RESEARCH DEPARTMENT

The military order issued by President Bush to try suspected terrorists in military tribunals, rather than the regular courts of the American justice system, abandons the principles of justice and liberty that are the foundation of the American constitution, which is at the core of America’s democracy.

   It has given the executive arm of the government dictatorial powers to jail or execute non-American citizens and to incarcerate, without trial or evidence, US citizens suspected of terrorist activity. William Safire said in his column in the New York Times: “ We are letting George W. Bush to get away with replacing the American rule of law with military kangaroo courts… and in a purely Orwellian twist, Bush’s order calls this ‘a full and fair trial.’

   To avoid any possibility of legal challenges in the American civil courts, to its use of military to try suspects, the trials will be held in American military bases in the US and elsewhere - in other countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan and on American ships at sea. These trials will be secret; there will be no juries, only panels of military officers who will act as judges with the power to impose the death penalty.

   Many of the protections afforded to defendants in civilian courts, such as protection against self-discrimination, the right to the defence of one’s choice and to be told the charges against you and see the evidence, will not necessarily apply in these military tribunals.

   Another difference is that the rules of evidence will differ from those required by either, civilian courts or by a military court martial. This will allow prosecutors to be liberal when presenting evidence; verbal testimony will be allowed, as would any documentary evidence that had not been authenticated for its veracity - a standard required by civilian and criminal courts in American.

   Finally, if convicted, the defendants will have a very limited right of appeal to a special three-member review panel appointed by the President. They would not have access to the federal courts or the American appeals system.

  The sheer arrogance of Mr. Bush’s administration is breathtaking. A posting on the website, the Rational Radical* (www.therationalradical.com) succinctly demonstrates this arrogance, by likening his actions to Saddam Hussein of Iraq. This analogy clearly shows the double standards of the current American administration. Here is what the Rational Radical has to say: “Imagine, that Saddam Hussein, invoking emergency powers as a response to attacks on his country, issues an order that allows him to sent Iraqi agents to abduct American citizens, and have those U.S. citizens detained and tortured by a third country until confessions were extracted. Then he proceeds to set up Iraqi military tribunals, to try them in secret without the right to a lawyer of their choosing, and using tainted evidence, such as confessions extracted under torture, convict them and sentence them to death. They would not even have the right of appeal to any Iraqi court or international body. The response from the American government would be outrage, followed by threats of retribution!

  Well, the powers hypothetically ascribed to Saddam Hussein are exactly the same powers Mr. Bush has given himself, in respect of non-American citizens. So what is outrageous abuse of power by one, must also be outrageous abuse of power by the other. However, it seems that America considers that no other nation has the right to take the same actions for their protection. President Bush, and his administration see themselves as the good guys and everyone else as the bad guys; and being the bad guys, they should not enjoy the same rights, once America has accused them of being the ‘villains”.

  The Radical concludes: “The benchmark of a nation’s legal authority is reciprocity. If America maintains that no other nation can abduct, try in secret and execute American citizens, then there is no justification for America to say that it should have these rights with respect to other country’s citizens.”

  Ex-president Bill Clinton now travels the world as a highly paid speaker on public affairs, reputedly earning in excess of $100,000 for each appearance and speech. Imagine if the government of Serbia decided to abduct him forcibly while he on a speaking tour in Europe. Then put him on trial in Serbia, and if convicted threaten to execute him for the merciless bombing of the people of Serbia for 78 days and nights, and the senseless taking of lives of hundreds, if not thousands of innocent civilians. The outrage and indignation following such an act would ensure that the American government could, and would use overwhelming force to rescue him; and should they fail, they would certainly destroy Serbia in another bombing campaign.

   However, situations like these will never happen. America, by virtue of being the predominant military and economic power on the planet, can through its global reach guarantee that none of its citizens are brought to book for war crimes or international acts of terrorism. The reality is that there is no other nation that can challenge the power of the United States when it decides to exert it. As one American pundit is quoted as saying. “If you’re the biggest, baddest bear in the woods you get to sit anywhere you like.”

   As we can see from the examples above, President Bush and his administration have elevated American arrogance to new heights. This arrogance will further alienate it from the rest of the international community, who are striving to introduce an international criminal court to try terrorists and human rights violators, fairly and impartially. But while the U.S. remains the only superpower, it can, as the biggest bear in the wood, do very much as it likes. So instead of a unified world court in which to try all who are accused of terrorism and war crimes fairly and impartially, we have American Military Tribunals instead.