Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 10, 2006 22:21:10 GMT -5
Looking for Agreement on Tribunals for Detainees
The main Senate Republican in talks with the White House over bills to
establish tribunals for terror suspects said Friday that a small set of
problems divided the two sides and that they would negotiate through the
weekend in an effort to reach a compromise.
The senator, John W. Warner of Virginia, chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee, said 90 percent of the proposal that the White House
submitted this week reflected a proposal that he and other Republican
senators who have taken the lead on the question had drafted over the
summer.
The senators, Mr. Warner, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain
of Arizona, maintain that they can work with the administration to resolve
the differences, but they showed few signs of yielding on the disputed
questions. "The determination simply has to be made on what flexibility
the administration wants to show," Mr. Warner said.
The disputed issues are the same ones that the Supreme Court cited in
striking down a system of tribunals that the administration established
after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. They include whether suspects can be
excluded from their trials and what types of evidence would be admissible.
"I feel strongly about this," Mr. Warner said. "I want to be supportive of
the president."
But as a lawyer and former Navy secretary, he said, "I feel this bill has
got to pass what I call the federal court muster, so this thing doesn't
get tangled up in the courts again and go all the way to the Supreme
Court, and then down she goes again."
Mr. Warner said that his committee would have its legislation ready for a
vote next week, whether or not the White House agrees to all its
provisions. He predicted that the Senate would quickly pass it.
"We dont need a lot of time," he said. "We all know what the issues are. I
don't see a prolonged debate."
There is no certainty that the committee bill will reach the Senate floor
if there is no deal with the White House. The Senate majority leader, Bill
Frist of Tennessee, has said he will decide next week whether to bring the
committee bill to the floor or bring up the version that President Bush
proposed on Wednesday.
House Republican leaders have said they intend to pass the White House
version.
The Supreme Court ruled in June that the tribunals the White House
established violated the Constitution and international law by denying
terror suspects basic human and legal rights.
Chiefly, the court objected to excluding suspects from trials and allowing
hearsay and evidence obtained under coercion. It faulted the
administration system to have a military lawyer oversee the proceedings,
as opposed to a judge, as in military courts-martial. The court added that
the jury size was too small.
Mr. Bush's new proposal allows for a military judge and expands the jury
from a minimum of 3 people to5, the minimum the court said was required
under courts-martial, with 12 for cases involving the death penalty.
The administration proposal would allow hearsay and evidence obtained by
coercion, if the judge rules it was probative and reliable.
The plan would also deny the accused the right to see and therefore
respond to classified evidence that the jury could use to convict him,
although the defendant could be allowed a summary of it.
That provision, Mr. Graham said this week, would be struck down by a court
"in 30 seconds."
Mr. Graham in particular, a former military lawyer and a military reserve
judge, has been inclined to follow the advice of the military lawyers on
the shape of the tribunals.
Mr. McCain, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, has argued that any
system would set a precedent for how other countries try American troops
and that passing a system that excluded the defendant opened up Americans
to being tried in kangaroo courts elsewhere.
A spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Washington
said Friday that it would visit the 14 new detainees being held at the
naval base in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba, as soon as it received permission from
the Defense Department.
An official with the Red Cross in Washington, Simon Schorno, said: "We do
not have a date yet. But as soon as we get confirmation, we will undertake
a visit as soon as possible."
Mr. Schorno said his organization had a team of about 10 people on
standby. The team, which includes officials in the Washington office, will
draw Red Cross employees from elsewhere to work as translators.
He said the first order of business would be to interview the detainees
"and give them the means to contact their families through Red Cross
messages."
The Red Cross, Mr. Schorno added, will assess the detention conditions in
the undisclosed locations where the inmates had been held and now at
Guantnamo.
By agreement with the United States government, the Red Cross will, in
exchange for access, not make public its views on the conditions of
confinement and treatment.
Mr. Schorno said his organization might announce the fact of the visit
when it occurred because of the wide public interest in it.
(source: New York Times)
The main Senate Republican in talks with the White House over bills to
establish tribunals for terror suspects said Friday that a small set of
problems divided the two sides and that they would negotiate through the
weekend in an effort to reach a compromise.
The senator, John W. Warner of Virginia, chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee, said 90 percent of the proposal that the White House
submitted this week reflected a proposal that he and other Republican
senators who have taken the lead on the question had drafted over the
summer.
The senators, Mr. Warner, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain
of Arizona, maintain that they can work with the administration to resolve
the differences, but they showed few signs of yielding on the disputed
questions. "The determination simply has to be made on what flexibility
the administration wants to show," Mr. Warner said.
The disputed issues are the same ones that the Supreme Court cited in
striking down a system of tribunals that the administration established
after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. They include whether suspects can be
excluded from their trials and what types of evidence would be admissible.
"I feel strongly about this," Mr. Warner said. "I want to be supportive of
the president."
But as a lawyer and former Navy secretary, he said, "I feel this bill has
got to pass what I call the federal court muster, so this thing doesn't
get tangled up in the courts again and go all the way to the Supreme
Court, and then down she goes again."
Mr. Warner said that his committee would have its legislation ready for a
vote next week, whether or not the White House agrees to all its
provisions. He predicted that the Senate would quickly pass it.
"We dont need a lot of time," he said. "We all know what the issues are. I
don't see a prolonged debate."
There is no certainty that the committee bill will reach the Senate floor
if there is no deal with the White House. The Senate majority leader, Bill
Frist of Tennessee, has said he will decide next week whether to bring the
committee bill to the floor or bring up the version that President Bush
proposed on Wednesday.
House Republican leaders have said they intend to pass the White House
version.
The Supreme Court ruled in June that the tribunals the White House
established violated the Constitution and international law by denying
terror suspects basic human and legal rights.
Chiefly, the court objected to excluding suspects from trials and allowing
hearsay and evidence obtained under coercion. It faulted the
administration system to have a military lawyer oversee the proceedings,
as opposed to a judge, as in military courts-martial. The court added that
the jury size was too small.
Mr. Bush's new proposal allows for a military judge and expands the jury
from a minimum of 3 people to5, the minimum the court said was required
under courts-martial, with 12 for cases involving the death penalty.
The administration proposal would allow hearsay and evidence obtained by
coercion, if the judge rules it was probative and reliable.
The plan would also deny the accused the right to see and therefore
respond to classified evidence that the jury could use to convict him,
although the defendant could be allowed a summary of it.
That provision, Mr. Graham said this week, would be struck down by a court
"in 30 seconds."
Mr. Graham in particular, a former military lawyer and a military reserve
judge, has been inclined to follow the advice of the military lawyers on
the shape of the tribunals.
Mr. McCain, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, has argued that any
system would set a precedent for how other countries try American troops
and that passing a system that excluded the defendant opened up Americans
to being tried in kangaroo courts elsewhere.
A spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Washington
said Friday that it would visit the 14 new detainees being held at the
naval base in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba, as soon as it received permission from
the Defense Department.
An official with the Red Cross in Washington, Simon Schorno, said: "We do
not have a date yet. But as soon as we get confirmation, we will undertake
a visit as soon as possible."
Mr. Schorno said his organization had a team of about 10 people on
standby. The team, which includes officials in the Washington office, will
draw Red Cross employees from elsewhere to work as translators.
He said the first order of business would be to interview the detainees
"and give them the means to contact their families through Red Cross
messages."
The Red Cross, Mr. Schorno added, will assess the detention conditions in
the undisclosed locations where the inmates had been held and now at
Guantnamo.
By agreement with the United States government, the Red Cross will, in
exchange for access, not make public its views on the conditions of
confinement and treatment.
Mr. Schorno said his organization might announce the fact of the visit
when it occurred because of the wide public interest in it.
(source: New York Times)