Forums de l'ASSÉ

Top court rules against Bush's Gitmo tribunals
29/06/2006 11:32:15 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. President George Bush overstepped his authority by holding war crimes tribunals for detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the proposed trials violated U.S. law and the Geneva Convention.

The ruling -- one of the last on the docket before the court breaks for three months -- serves as a rebuke to the government's anti-terror policies.

Bush responded to the ruling at a press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. He prefaced his comments by saying he has only had time to receive a "drive-by briefing" on the decision.

However, he seemed optimistic the government can find a way for the military tribunals to continue.

"As I understand it, please don't hold me to this, there is a way forward with military tribunals in working with the United States Congress. As I understand, certain senators have already been out expressing their desire to address what the Supreme Court found," Bush said.

"We've got people looking at it right now to determine how we can work with Congress to solve the problem, if it's available."

Bush stressed the safety of the American people is paramount.

"We will seriously look at the decision, but one thing I am not going to do is jeopardize the safety of the American people. People have got to understand that. I understand we're in a war on terror. These people were picked up on the battlefield. I will protect the people and at the same time conform to the findings of the Supreme Court."

Two years ago the court rejected the president's claim that as commander-in-chief he has the authority to detain terror suspects indefinitely and deny them access to courts or lawyers.

Bush has described the 460 Guantanamo Bay detainees as enemy combatants, and maintains that as such, the rules that govern the handling of prisoners of war don't apply.

In this most recent case, the Supreme Court focused on the issue of trials for some of the men.

The nation's highest court was examining a myriad of challenges in the case of Osama bin Laden's former chauffeur -- one of 10 detainees the Bush administration wants to put before a war crimes tribunal at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay.

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001, is charged with conspiracy to commit war crimes, murder, and terror acts against the U.S.

Khadr to request extradition

Another detainee expected to face the tribunal is 19-year-old Canadian Omar Khadr, captured in Afghanistan in 2002 during the U.S.-led invasion.

Thursday's ruling seemed to inspire Khadr's lawyer to request his client's extradition.

"We haven't formally requested his extradition but we will do that," Edmonton lawyer Dennis Edney told The Canadian Press.

"They should send him back to Canada. We have laws dealing with war crimes committed abroad."

Khadr, then 15, allegedly killed a U.S. army medic during a firefight in which Khadr himself was wounded.

He faces murder and other charges by virtue of having been declared an illegal combatant by the Americans.

Khadr was scheduled to appear at a military tribunal June 26.

But the U.S. military announced earlier this month that it is extending a stay on war crimes tribunals following three recent alleged suicides at the prison camp.

Human rights groups contend the tribunals, formally called military commissions, are flawed because they violate basic protections and would offer little legal protection.

Human rights groups contend the tribunals, formally called military commissions, are flawed because they violate basic protections and would offer little legal protection.

The Thursday ruling could have a profound effect on the future of the controversial military tribunals, said CTV's legal analyst Steven Skurka.

"What this decision today says is Bush, you're wrong. You've exceeded your power, you've violated U.S. law, you've violated the Geneva Convention," Skurka told CTV Newsnet.

"(The ruling says) these are not enemy combatants they are prisoners of war and ... they must have the most basic rights. They cannot be tried by military tribunal they have to have regular procedural rights just like any one else in the United States."

The ruling has been long awaited by groups such as Human Rights Watch, which has called on Bush to shut down Gitmo.

It has also been eagerly anticipated by administration officials, who want to bring charges against more detainees.

Bush's administration has argued that the president has the power to set up the tribunals based on his authority as commander in chief and on a resolution approved by the Congress allowing military force after the Sept. 11 attacks.

In Tel Aviv, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said earlier this week that the ruling may answer questions about the use of tribunals and the application of the Geneva Conventions, which provide prisoners greater legal rights.

"That (ruling) will provide additional clarity," he said.

"We made the best judgment we can -- the executive branch -- based on court precedent, based upon our reading of the law, based upon our reading of the U.S. Constitution," Gonzales said.

"At the end of the day, it is up to the courts to make the decision as to whether or not we made the right call."

Bush has suggested the high court's ruling will help him decide what to do with those 10 detainees and the more than 400 "enemy combatants" being held at Guantanamo.

The Supreme Court's ruling involved eight of the nine court members.

Chief Justice John Roberts has removed himself from the case because he was part of a U.S. appeals court panel that ruled against Hamdan before he joined the top court's benches.