Five years of Guantanamo: Justice delayed is justice denied

[Michaelangelica]

Five years of Guantanamo: Justice delayed is justice denied.

Happy anniversary to all those in Guantanamo.

Amnesty International

Human rights and security issues:-
Amnesty International Australia - Human Rights and Security in Australia

[Racoon]

And 5 more if necessary.

[Michaelangelica]

Hicks' lawyer hits back at prosecutor - National - theage.com.au

Major Mori gives Australians faith in the American system.

More injustice

"

[Michaelangelica]

Australia Wants Health Report on Guantanamo Detainee (Update2)

By Gemma Daley

Jan. 31 (Bloomberg) -- Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock asked for an ``urgent'' report from the U.S. on the state of health of David Hicks, who has been held at Guantanamo Bay for almost six years without trial.

``I've asked for an assessment to be carried out and that be dealt with as a matter of urgency,'' Ruddock told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio today. ``He is certainly in a single cell and that's for the purpose of ensuring that he is detained in a way that is humane.''

Hicks, 31, has been in held in the U.S. military prison in Cuba since he was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and accused of training with al-Qaeda.



Lawyer David McLeod visited Hicks yesterday and said he was chained to the floor for 22 hours a day and hadn't seen sunlight for months.

``His visage was an extremely sorrowful one,'' McLeod told the ABC. ``He continues to be locked up for 22 hours per day.''

Bloomberg.com: Australia & New Zealand

KELVIN THOMSON: I'm concerned about the fact that the United States Secretary of Defence has approved a range of interrogation techniques for the US army field manuals for use at Guantanamo Bay and that when I asked this question the Attorney-General's Department, it turned out that we have not asked that these techniques not be used on David Hicks.

PETA DONALD: What sort of techniques are you talking about?

KELVIN THOMSON: The initial list, prior to January 2003 included hooding, stripping prisoners naked, interrogation for up to 20 hours, the use of detainees' individual phobias such as fear of dogs to induce stress. There was a second list of interrogation techniques approved after January 2003 which involved things like removal of comfort items like toilet paper, exposure to extreme temperatures, reversing sleep cycles from night to day, and isolation.


TONY EASTLEY: But he's been held for many, many years now and I'm just wondering if you've not asked what interrogation techniques may have been used against him?

ALEXANDER DOWNER: Well we've asked in relation to David Hicks and when there have been allegations that he has been tortured we've had those allegations investigated. In fact, on two occasions they've been investigated by the Americans and the Americans have told us that it's not correct that he has been tortured.

AM - Alexander Downer comments on Hicks' detainment conditions
Twenty two to twenty four hours a day in a dark cell is not touture?
Look up the CIA research on the most effective torture -sensory deprivation

Evidence against Hicks was still being reviewed.

"The prosecution is currently still reviewing the evidence and the new rules of military commission, and when they are ready they will bring charges as appropriate," Major Beth Kubala, a spokeswoman for the Office of Military Commissions, told AAP.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard has set a deadline of mid-February for the US government to charge Hicks.

Hicks, 31, has been in US custody since his capture near Baghlan, Afghanistan, in December 2001.

The Adelaide man has been held at the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for more than five years.

Evidence against Hicks under review: US - Breaking News - World - Breaking News

[Michaelangelica]

Hicks can't get fair trial

: Fraser

It seems barely a day goes by now without the Government taking a hit from within its own ranks on the case of David Hicks. This morning it was the former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser airing his views. He said it was now impossible for Mr Hicks to have a fair trial.
Mr Fraser says it would be too embarrassing for both the United States and Australia for David Hicks to be declared innocent, so both countries were doing all they could to ensure a guilty verdict.
Mr Fraser's criticism comes as the Pentagon today publicly released more details of the new case against Mr Hicks.

MARK COLVIN: It seems barely a day goes by now without the Government taking a hit from within its own ranks on the case of David Hicks.

This morning it was the former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser airing his views. He said it was now impossible for Mr Hicks to have a fair trial.

Mr Fraser says it would be too embarrassing for both the United States and Australia for David Hicks to be declared innocent, so both countries were doing all they could to ensure a guilty verdict.

Mr Fraser's criticism comes as the Pentagon today publicly released more details of the new case against Mr Hicks.

From Canberra Gillian Bradford reports.

GILLIAN BRADFORD: John Howard would almost be used to the daily parade of people speaking out against the detention of David Hicks, including senior figures from his own side of politics.

MALCOLM FRASER: From the President to the Ambassador, Americans have said that Hicks is guilty. They're saying, make sure he's convicted.

GILLIAN BRADFORD: Former Liberal prime minister, Malcolm Fraser, has voiced his concerns before and today at a human rights conference he again detailed why he thinks it's so wrong to keep holding David Hicks.

MALCOLM FRASER: After five years of inhumane and degrading treatment, the verdict of innocence would be extraordinarily embarrassing to both governments. Perhaps enough to defeat a government, as more and more Australian really come to understand the nature of the Government's betrayal of the rights of an Australian citizen.

PM - Hicks can't get fair trial: Fraser

[Michaelangelica]

Any other people who would like to vote for justice; please feel free
www.getup.org.au/campaign/AussieToAussie

Howard is known as "bonzi" ie a little bush

Dear friends,

That's what Australia wants, and last week John Howard publicly admitted he has the power to do it. But year after year he refuses. He'd rather see David Hicks tried under a sham system of justice, destined to be challenged in US courts for years to come.

We've tried everything, but sometimes the only way to get results is to speak to politicians in the language they care about. Our Prime Minister didn't care about David Hicks' basic legal rights until the opinion polls told him he should.

So today we're reaching out to the one group John Howard can't disregard - and asking you to write to them personally. Use our newest technology to send your own message to a resident of John Howard's electorate of Bennelong, in Sydney's North, asking them to join the call for justice.

www.getup.org.au/campaign/AussieToAussie

We'll compile every personal message and hand-deliver an individual letter to every home in Bennelong. We'll also give every resident there a Bring David Hicks Home postcard to fill in and send straight to the Prime Minister's office.

Since the Prime Minister is determined to play politics, we know our democracy is the best and only way to hold him accountable. And when he starts receiving thousands of postcards urging him to bring David Hicks home, he'll know they're from voters in his own marginal seat.

www.getup.org.au/campaign/AussieToAussie

With your actions and support, we've put up billboards, organised candle-lit vigils and commissioned independent polls revealing the vast majority of Australians don't believe David Hicks can receive a fair trial in Guantanamo Bay, and must now be brought home.

We've worked alongside a chorus of human rights advocates, law councils and every State and Territory Attorney-General in Australia to make our arguments heard. Yet when GetUp staff went to Canberra last week we met with politicians from all parties still deeply frustrated over the Prime Minister's refusal to act.

The only thing left is to reach out to the one group of people John Howard can't disregard: the people whose votes will directly determine the future of his political career. Join voices now - Australian to Australian - home to home, and help deliver a message the Prime Minister must finally face.

www.getup.org.au/campaign/AussieToAussie


Thanks for taking action,

The GetUp team

PS: Last week GetUp launched a national television advertising campaign to Bring David Hicks Home. The ad will play over the next few weeks and has already received national media attention. You can watch it now on GetUp's website.

[Boerseun]

I'm no fan of the Guantanamo Bay issue, which in my opinion is simply a sham to move suspects off US soil in order to deny them due process.

But, from another angle, what if Hicks is actually guilty? What was he doing with Al Qaida in the first place?

This whole effort of mobilising popular opinion to the "Bring Hicks Home" campaign might be losing sight of that possibility. And on who's face will the egg land when he does, in fact, turn out to be guilty?

In my opinion, everybody in Guantanamo must be relocated to proper prisons, and charged with whatever they're suspected of so that the Law can take its course.

If you torture someone, they'll confess to absolutely anything. Which is why confessions under torture is useless as evidence in trials, and are only used by tinpot dictatorships who does it in order to generate scapegoats for any issue imaginable. Well, that used to be the case, until Bush the Lesser decided to steer the US, that mighty vehicle of Human Rights, Freedoms and Respect away from the narrow path delineating the Moral High Ground by implementing the absolutely disgusting and morally indefensible concept of Guantanamo Bay.

I'm not agreeing or defending Guantanamo in the least, as should be evident in this post. What I am saying, though, is that there might just be a real reason for Hicks still being there, and politicising the issue might make for cheap politics and not much else.

[Fatstep]

I believe they just moved them there to inact the writ of habeas corpus.
If in another country the laws of the U.S. should apply is it is land onwed by the U.S.

Also, the people they took from their homes and sent to guantanamo because their name was arabic is stupid, so is eminent domain without reasonable cause.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by Boerseun

But, from another angle, what if Hicks is actually guilty? What was he doing with Al Qaida in the first place?
…
I'm not agreeing or defending Guantanamo in the least, as should be evident in this post. What I am saying, though, is that there might just be a real reason for Hicks still being there, and politicising the issue might make for cheap politics and not much else.

Though we’ve all heard it (and most of us said it) before, it bears repeating:

The issue is not whether the internees of Guantanamo are good people or bad, guilty or innocent of anything of which they may or many not be suspected, or more or less likely to pose dangers to the People of the US and the world as a result of their internment – it is whether they are or are not receiving the due process of law guaranteed by the US Constitution. The Fifth Amendment has not been amended to read:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation unless the President of the United States says so

- despite recent (1/17/07) statement by United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

The Constitution doesn't say every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas, …

Suspension of due process rights in the US is not unprecedented – Lincoln did it, as did Grant. I strongly suspect that history will look less kindly on Bush than it has on these 2 Civil War-era presidents.

[Fatstep]

It does mention some rights may be refused in times of war.