John Byrne
Raw Story
Septmeber 24, 2009
President Barack Obama has quietly decided to bypass Congress and allow the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects without charges.
The move, which was controversial when the idea was first floated in The Washington Post in May, has sparked serious concern among civil liberties advocates. Such a decision allows the president to unilaterally hold “combatants” without habeas corpus — a legal term literally meaning “you shall have the body” — which forces prosecutors to charge a suspect with a crime to justify the suspect’s detention.
Obama’s decision was buried on page A 23 of The New York Times’ New York edition on Thursday. It didn’t appear on that page in the national edition. (Meanwhile, the front page was graced with the story, “Richest Russian’s Newest Toy: An N.B.A. Team.”)
Rather than seek approval from Congress to hold some 50 Guantanamo detainees indefinitely, the administration has decided that it has the authority to hold the prisoners under broad-ranging legislation passed in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001. Former President George W. Bush frequently invoked this legislation as the justification for controversial legal actions — including the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program.
“The administration will continue to hold the detainees without bringing them to trial based on the power it says it has under the Congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, authorizing the president to use force against forces of Al Qaeda and the Taliban,” the Times‘ Peter Baker writes. “In concluding that it does not need specific permission from Congress to hold detainees without charges, the Obama administration is adopting one of the arguments advanced by the Bush administration in years of debates about detention policies.”
Constitutional scholar and Salon.com columnist Glenn Greenwald discussed the policy in a column in May. He warned that the ability for a president to “preventively” detain suspects could mushroom into broader, potentially abusive activity.
“It does not merely allow the U.S. Government to imprison people alleged to have committed Terrorist acts yet who are unable to be convicted in a civilian court proceeding,” Greenwald wrote. “That class is merely a subset, perhaps a small subset, of who the Government can detain. Far more significant, ‘preventive detention’ allows indefinite imprisonment not based on proven crimes or past violations of law, but of those deemed generally ‘dangerous’ by the Government for various reasons
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(430)
-
▼
September
(47)
- WMD now in Iran - BS!
- twice as likely
- Following our earlier report about a paramilitary ...
- Hardin
- No title
- The Ring Of Power 1 of 29
- Endgame
- Endgame Lyrics
- The Obama Deception
- No title
- Charlie Sheen's Message to the President
- Life During Wartime
- No title
- Preventive Detention
- No title
- French Nurses
- Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.)
- Little Tony's Foreign Policy
- National Platform of the Libertarian Party
- 15 year old girl
- No title
- An Illinois sheriff this week is seeking to revers...
- No title
- Obama not all bad
- MSNBC Beyond Misleading
- Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox
- Oh Jimmy Carter
- Do you know these lyrics?
- Prophecies of "That Guy From Oklahoma"
- Bow Wow Wow
- Fernando
- Castles Made of Sand
- The more things CHANGE the more they stay the SAME
- No title
- O'Reilly, You're the Pinhead!
- Sheen to meet with Obama?
- Buddy Guy
- No Refusal Weekend and the Squeezer
- Ancaster UFO Report September 2009
- The Red Pill
- TGIT
- Cheney Responsible for 9/11
- Vaccinations Fuel Pandemics?
- 36,000 vs 477
- Turkmenistan
- War
- It's Back
-
▼
September
(47)
No comments:
Post a Comment