The Bush administration certainly left them with quite a mess. If I understand correctly, the Right's position (at least as articulated by UNRR) is that:Marc believes that the government can convict most high value detainees without evidence obtained from torture:
Reporters with better sources than I might want to see if they can figure out (a) the number of detainees the DOJ believes were tortured and b) of those who were tortured, those for whom the government has little other evidence. I suspect that there are very few HVTs who fit into both categories. Of course, if the government's not confident it can try these folks, what will become of them? I'm not sure the Obama administration knows at this point.
- These prisoners have no rights, neither constitutional nor of international war, because they aren't state-sponsored actors or their states don't follow them.
- Ideally the US should summarily execute them, despite the fact that this is illegal under the domestic and international laws of war.
- Under no circumstances should they be given a fair trial or access to U.S. courts.
- At best, they should be detained indefinitely.
Did I overstate or miss anything?
"- These prisoners have no rights, neither constitutional nor of international war, because they aren't state-sponsored actors or their states don't follow them."
ReplyDeleteThat's my position, and I think that one is shared by many on the right.
"- Ideally the US should summarily execute them, despite the fact that this is illegal under the domestic and international laws of war."
Having them subject to summary execution -- whether actually executed or not -- would have been my preferred policy. But we didn't do that, and years have passed. Anything we do now is going to seem even more arbitrary, since Bush had no policy at all other than just holding them.
"- Under no circumstances should they be given a fair trial or access to U.S. courts."
I'm not sure about that. On the one hand they aren't criminals, they are foreign enemies. But on the other hand, we need to do something with them. Some sort of military tribunals would seem to be the best option, but I'm not sure how that would work under the restrictions imposed by the Supreme Court. I do think trying them in civilian court should be a last resort. They should definitely not be tried under any circumstances where we think a known terrorist might walk free because evidence can't be used.
"- At best, they should be detained indefinitely."
I'd say at worst not at best. Holding them indefinitely is an admission that we have no policy toward captured terrorists. What are we going to do if we capture more of them?
> They should definitely not be tried under any circumstances where we think a known terrorist might walk free because evidence can't be used.
ReplyDeleteSo what are we left with for such, then? Still indefinite detention?
> I'd say at worst not at best. Holding them indefinitely is an admission that we have no policy toward captured terrorists. What are we going to do if we capture more of them?
Well obviously Bush-era policies were unsustainable, but I meant at best for the suspects, i.e. what's the brightest future they can look forward to if the Right has its way?
"So what are we left with for such, then? Still indefinite detention?"
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Ambinder post, there is supposed to be some sort of new tribunal arrangement. That's probably the best option, depending on how it works.
"but I meant at best for the suspects, i.e. what's the brightest future they can look forward to if the Right has its way?"
Hopefully they have no future. We are only talking about the 14 so-called "high value" terrorists, right? Our only goal for them should be figuring out how we can make sure they are either executed or imprisoned forever in some politically feasible way.
For the others: Anyone who is wanted in any other country should be returned there. If we are still holding anyone who we think is innocent, they should be released to anyone that will take them. The remaining prisoners, the more questionable cases where the evidence is unclear, can be determined by whatever tribunal stetup we employ. As a last resort I would try them in civilian court.