FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Justice Delayed is Murder, and a War Crime

 

The dramatic Supreme Court decision last month declaring the Bush administration’s Guantanamo military tribunals scheme to be lawless and unconstitutional, is a landmark ruling that strikes a powerful blow for liberty. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld represents our democracy at its best, with a judicial branch taking its constitutional role seriously and boldly examining what our chief executive’s actions. There could be not have been a happier day for a constitutional and human rights lawyer like myself.

But my joy in finally getting this decision was tempered by the knowledge that it came a few days late. Just two weeks earlier, three of the Guantanamo detainees that we were representing at the Center for Constitutional Rights committed suicide, despairing that they would ever be released from their horrific and illegal confinement. Making that tragic incident all the more horrible and personally wrenching for me, since one of the victims was my own client–is knowing that he had actually been scheduled to be released three days hence. Because of the wall of secrecy and inaccessibility the government has illegally erected around the detainees, even with the information recently released via a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit we could not identify him and get word to him about his impending release in time.

As the lead habeas attorney for 300 of the Guantanamo detainees for CCR, the organization that brought the original challenge to the unlawful detention of hundreds of men in Guantánamo Bay, I am intimately aware of the wretched conditions under which they have been living, and of the unconstitutional lengths to which this administration has gone to keep them beyond court jurisdiction. In our original case, Rasul v. Bush, the High Court, upholding a tradition of more than 800 years’ standing, said every person gets to challenge the King’s decision to place him or her in the dungeon, and the King must provide a legally cognizable reason. When that first ruling came down on June 28, 2004, I assumed our system of checks and balances was working well.

But I was wrong.

Lawyers for the detainees still had to endure two years of Administration refusal to comply with the court’s decision, with the Justice Department attorneys insisting people might have the right to go to court but once there they have no protections to be enforced. Now we know this obscene delaying tactic for what it has been from the start: a blatant trampling on the Constitution by the President.

But this struggle wasn’t simply an arcane legal argument between lawyers. The two long years it took for us to get back to the Supreme Court took their toll on the Guantánamo prisoners. There have been many suicide attempts, and finally three lives were lost in their quest for justice from a country that once was a beacon of liberty. The Supreme Court’s forceful decision in June cannot bring back the lives of those men, at least one of whom–my client– was known to be innocent of any crime. Nor can it give back the years–five in many cases–that have been stolen from the Guantanamo detainees, some of who were children when they were snatched from their countries by American forces, and most of whom even military officials admit are not guilty of anything.

The Bush Administration has thumbed its nose at the Constitution for too long at Guantanamo, and at other secret detention facilities around the globe. This issue of denying basic justice to wartime captives is not simply a matter of misinterpreting the law–it is a willful affront to the rule of law here in America, and to international law. It is also a stain on the honor of this nation.

The blood of three detainees who, despairing of receiving justice, killed themselves, is on the hands of this administration. It is wonderful that President Bush’s abuse of power in this case has been slapped down by the Supreme Court, but more is called for. This abuse of power and willful violation of the rule of law and of the Geneva Conventions call for his impeachment.

Barbara Olshansky is an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Right and the lead habeas counsel for 300 of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. She is co-author, with Dave Lindorff, of “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, May 2006).

Barbara and Dave will be discussing the book at Robin’s Books, 108 s. 13th Street, Philadelphia at 7 pm on Wednesday, Aug 2. The event is being taped for broadcast by C-Span’s Books-TV program.

 

 

More articles by:

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail