In a dramatic break with the Bush administration, the Justice Department on Friday announced it is doing away with the designation of "enemy combatant," which allowed the United States to hold suspected terrorists at length without criminal charges. ...The headline-writer didn't seem to have any understanding of what's involved. It wouldn't matter if they were using another "term" for the same thing. What matters is the government is dropping the legal designation "enemy combatant", which Cheney and Bush used as an escuse to violate international treaties and domestic law on the treatment of prisoners. The fact that the Republican Supreme Court upheld their use of the category is also appalling.
The announcement says the Justice Department will no longer rely on the the president's authority as commander in chief, but on authority specifically granted by Congress.
This is great news in itself. It will also enhance the reputation of the US and the Obama administration in most of the world.
But it is not a substitute for requiring full legal accountability of Cheney-Bush officials for criminal actions committed, especially on the torture policy. It establishes a healthier historical precedent.
But people like Dick Cheney will make up their own historical precedents. And they don't care if Democrats follow the law as long as the Cheney types are not held responsible for criminal actions. Without actual prosecutions to impose legal penalties on the perpetrators and fully expose in court-vetted procedures the scope of the previous administrations misdeeds, the next Republican administration can be expected to go back to the same kinds of practices. And worse.
There's just go good way around the need to confront in the most formal way the breadth of illegality during the Cheney-Bush administration.
Tags: bush administration, obama administration, war+crimes
4 comments:
You do realize that the only thing that changed was they added the word "substantial" before the word support. That does narrow the definition some, but they changed exactly one word from the Bush definition. That's dramatic?
Your comment is confusing because they did drop the "enemy combatant" definition. They are still maintaining they have the power to detain suspects suspected of ties to Al Qa'ida under the Authorization of Force resolutoin of 2001.
It is definitely a step in the right direction. But not good enough to normalize the detention policy. The administration needs to resolve the cases of the current prisoners quickly: put them before impartial tribunals to determine if they have prisoner-of-war status and treat them accordingly if they do. If not, they should charge them in a US court or release them for lack of evidence.
Sorry for the confusion, wrote my post rather quickly after reading Obama's briefing...
Obama did drop enemy combatant. What I was trying to say, is that term, "enemy combatant" has a specific definition. Obama dropped that term, and replaced it with a new definition; the only difference between the old and new definition is the word "substantial" before the phrase "supports Al Qa'ida."
I don't think this is a big change.
Why I think this is the Executive still has the sole power to preventively detain suspects w/o due process.
You're right on that. Congress needs to step in and rule that out with an actual law. And do it while they have a President who can be persuaded to sign it. Because when Jeb Bush comes, it will be too late.
Post a Comment