U.S. military lawyer for Guantanamo prisoner files suit against White House

CNEWS ^ | 09 April 2004 | The Associated Press

[MegaSilver]

SEATTLE (AP) - A U.S. military lawyer assigned to defend accused terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden's former driver, now held at the prison camp in Guantanamo, Cuba, claims in a lawsuit against President George W. Bush's administration that trying terror suspects by military tribunal violates U.S. and international law.

The tribunal system is an unconstitutional expansion of executive branch powers, said the filing by U.S. navy Lt.-Cmdr. Charles Swift, whose client is one of six detainees the administration has said it plans to try by tribunal.

Salim Ahmad Hamdan, a 34-year-old Yememi, was once bin Laden's driver and was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001. He is being held at the U.S. naval base in Cuba.

The suit, filed in U.S. federal court this week, claims the government has violated Hamdan's rights by holding him without charges. Swift said Hamdan could serve a life sentence without having a chance to prove his innocence. A trial date has not been set.

Spokesman Maj. Michael Shavers said Thursday the U.S. Defence Department has no comment. The Bush administration has said it has wide legal latitude to interrogate detainees for extended periods since national security is at risk.

The lawsuit argues the Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the power to convene tribunals "inferior to the Supreme Court." The suit also said Hamdan's right to a speedy trial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention has been violated.

Slightly fewer than 600 detainees remain at Guantanamo. More than 130 have been freed and a dozen others have been transferred to the custody of their home countries.

Swift's filing is the first direct challenge of the detentions. Another case, arguing the U.S. government doesn't have jurisdiction because the detainees are not being kept on sovereign U.S. land, is to go before the Supreme Court this month.

Swift's lawsuit names as defendantst Bush, U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Brig.-Gen. Jay Hood in Guantanamo Bay, among others. It asks the court to order Hamdan's release and bar the government from proceeding with the tribunals.

Swift said Hamdan was simply a pilgrim who took a job at bin Laden's farm, that he had no knowledge of bin Laden's activities, that he never took up arms against the United States and the government has no basis for declaring him an "enemy combatant."

Hamdan was captured by tribesmen interested in collecting U.S. bounties on suspected terrorists, Swift wrote.

[Dr. Marten]

Tell me again whose country this guy serves?

[Support Free Republic]

Click Here to Donate to Free Republic By Secure Server

Or mail checks to:        
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

Or you can use:                     
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
Found in the breaking news sidebar!

[corkoman]

they probably encouraged this guy to do this so they can get finality on the Exec's use of "enemy combatant" status which does not provide for UCMC or geneva. Might as well get a military attny to get this over with.

[MegaSilver]

The tribunal system is an unconstitutional expansion of executive branch powers, said the filing by U.S. navy Lt.-Cmdr. Charles Swift, whose client is one of six detainees the administration has said it plans to try by tribunal.

There's something called the fourth amendment.

What is it with Liberals? Have they never read the Constitution?

[MegaSilver]

Erm, make that FIFTH. Apparently, I need to read the Constitution again.

[Drango]

Tell me again whose country this guy serves?

He is paid by you and I to be a strong advocate...IMHO he's doing what he should be doing and *IF* I was in trouble I'd want him for a lawyer...

[Lurking Libertarian]

Another view on this (from a blog on military law, by a law student-former military officer).

[steplock]

There is NOBODY I want for a lawyer!

Lawyers, politicians and activist judges should be taken out back and dealt with.

I would settle for "tar & feathers" for the scummy lot of them.

We have lawyer making laws so that we need lawyers to defend ourselves from other lawyers and be judged by even more corrupt lawyers.

Wasn't there something in our constitution stating something about the SEPERATION of POWERS? How and why do we allow these scumbags to make our laws as members of the Legislative Branch and then still be members of the Judicial Branch - and occasionally even members of the Executive Branch?

[Blue Screen of Death]

...IMHO he's doing what he should be doing...

Agree. We are a nation of laws and it is this guys job to defend his client to the best of his ability. Also, when people look at this they can see that the prisoners are getting good representation. This suit will settle a lot of complex questions that must be delt with according to the law.

[Razwan]

We should ask him about the times he pissed his pants (literally) at the hands of US military interrogators

[Congressman Billybob]

This lawyer is doing what every lawyer is expected to do, represent his client. However, the AP writer is apparently blissfully unaware of the fact that the US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously (8-0) that such military trials ARE constitutional.

That case, for people who want to know more than the lamestream media knows, is In re Quirin, 1942. And in that case, the military lawyers assigned to defend the eight German saboteurs ALSO took the case of their clients to the US Supreme Court to obtain that review of the legality of the trials.

Congressman Billybob

Click here, then click the blue CFR button, to join the anti-CFR effort (or visit the "Hugh & Series, Critical & Pulled by JimRob" thread). Please do it now.

[Congressman Billybob]

The Bill of Rights neither applies to, nor restricts, military tribunal trials. Read the Quirin case from 1942.

John / Billybob

[Sacajaweau]

I have to believe this is a deliberate leak.

[ApplegateRanch]

The Time Has Come:

When we run out of copies of the Koran, we'll need to start using the UN Charter & Geneva Protocol for toilet paper.

Too bad our guys captured any of these "people" (I use the term loosely) instead of shooting them in "escape attempts".

I'm sure I read that several, if not all, of the major defendants in the Nuremberg trials tried to claim such tribunals were illegal...but they still hanged by the neck, until dead.

What is good enough for Nazis is plenty good enough for Islamonazis.

I am sick and tired of the whining weenies of the left crying "Unfair," every time authority anywhere tries to hold anyone responsible in any way (unless, of course, if it is a 'hate crime') for their acts. And, as Mumia & Peltier attest, the more heinous, the louder the screaming.

They can at least wait until the tribunals are held, to SEE if they are fair or not. But, no; first they try to tie both feet and an arm behind our troops' backs; then want to hamstring the trials, as well. Why not just recommend them for medals, with moon & star cluster, while they're at it?

Who knows? Maybe, they will be acquitted, and offered jobs at UC, where they could be mentored by Angela Davis; or, put on-staff at VVAW.

Yhen again, maybe we should just release them all, not into the hands of their 'respective governments', but to some of our friends back where they were captured. /rant>

[Susannah]

If the perpetrators of 9/11 had been rounded up and held at Guantanamo based on suspicion to committ a terrorists act, the leftists lawyers would probably have come to their rescue too.

[Congressman Billybob]

There are reporters who cover the "court" beat. Cases, once filed, are public records and reportable as soon as the ink is dry on the clerk's receipt for the documents filed.

Most reporters I've dealt with will NOT cover a legal story concerning a case UNTIL THE CASE IS FILED. There's many a slip between the intent to file, and the real case.

So, I don't think this is a "leak." I think it is standard reporting of this kind of story.

John / Billybob

[Dr. Marten]

Thanks for putting that into perspective.