Guardian (UK) editorial - Guantánamo Bay: using the unusable

[Jackeens]

Guantánamo Bay: using the unusable

The Guardian, Saturday 23 May 2009

First, the facts. Of the 779 prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, 539 have been released (all but two by George Bush). That leaves 240 who are supposedly the worst of the worst. Of those, 30 cases have gone to a full hearing before a US federal court, where the US government's secret evidence is shown to counsel, but not to the prisoner. And in 25 of those cases the judges have ordered the prisoner's release – 17 Uighurs, five Algerians, two Yemenis and a Chadian. (So far, only four of the 25 have been released.) In other words, the US government has won its case that the prisoners remaining in Guantánamo are enemy combatants in only 17% of the cases that have gone before a federal judge. That is a dreadful batting average.

It is against this record that we have to place Barack Obama's proposal to create a preventive detention regime. It would be for prisoners who cannot be tried in a federal court because evidence was obtained by torture, but who are deemed too dangerous to be released. Even though Mr Obama pledged to create a system of checks and balances – say a judicial review every six months – it would not solve the dilemma that decisions are being made on unusable (and also unreliable) evidence.

Much of Mr Obama's speech this week at the National Archives was worthy of its location. Standing in front of the original copies of the US constitution and bill of rights, the president made the best possible case for saying that Americans do not have to choose between security and their democratic values, and that adherence to those values is the only defence against the enemy they face. This is not rhetoric. Mr Obama undoubtedly believes what he says, and he is treating his audience as adult by admitting to being troubled by some of the answers. But as a politician, as opposed to a student and teacher of the law, Mr Obama's instinct is to compromise. The question is whether the practice of indefinite detention, which runs counter to the entire US legal pro­cess, is susceptible to compromise.

Dick Cheney's reply to Mr Obama was, in a word, odious.....

more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/23/editorial-obama-cheney-guantanamo-evidence