Gitmo East

IBD Editorials ^ | February 24, 2009

[Kaslin]

War On Terror: The administration says the detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan cannot challenge their detentions and have no constitutional rights. Wouldn't that be a perfect place to send the Gitmo jihadists?

---

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that Guantanamo detainees had the legal right to challenge their detentions in American courts, four detainees held at Bagram thought they had a get out of jail free card. Following that ruling, petitions were filed on their behalf in a U.S. district court.

Apparently, in handling prisoners of war captured in the war on terror, the first law of real estate applies. The rights of detainees depend on location, location, location.

It is now the official opinion of the Obama administration that the detainees at Bagram have none while those at Gitmo, such as those who attacked the Navy destroyer Cole in a Yemeni harbor in 2000, have the same rights as any U.S. citizen.

Yes, we are confused too. In response to an inquiry by the judge regarding the habeas corpus rights of prisoners held in Afghanistan, acting Assistant Attorney General Michael Hertz made a terse reply in papers filed before the court: "Having considered the matter, the government adheres to its previous articulated position."

The Obama administration position is that Bagram, where 600 jihadists are being held, differs from Gitmo in that it is in an active war zone and that Gitmo is technically U.S. territory, where the U.S. Constitution holds sway.