Detainee Legal Mail to Be Reviewed

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204632204577126791984789450.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Yet another slam against the most basic of rights, attorney-client privilege. What the government does to detainees, it will do to citizens as well. Recall the passage of NDAA recently, which allows detention of American citizens without trial. -ed.

By JESS BRAVIN

The prison commander at Guantanamo Bay issued new rules allowing prison staff to examine mail between military-commission defendants and their lawyers, renewing a dispute with defense attorneys who say communications with their clients should remain confidential.

In a 21-page memorandum signed Tuesday, Rear Adm. David Woods said that teams—which include Defense Department attorneys and intelligence and law-enforcement personnel—assigned to review attorney-client correspondence for "physical contraband" such as paper clips could also seize and keep written materials if they "appear to violate" restrictions.

Related Reading

• Read the Order

• Previously: Lawyers of Alleged 9/11 Conspirators Object to Mail Monitoring(11/2/11)

Adm. Woods began tangling with defense attorneys soon after taking command earlier this year at the prison on the U.S. naval base in Cuba where suspected terrorists are held. He directed staff to seize the mail bins of detainees expected to face military-commission trials, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four others accused of organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In a separate case involving the review of detainee mail, a military judge at Guantanamo ordered prison officials in a ruling last month to stop reading mail between Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, the alleged planner of a 2000 attack on the USS Cole, and his attorneys. The military judge, Col. James Pohl, said that prison staff may review Mr. Nashiri's mail "only to ensure each page in the envelope is properly marked" as legal mail.

Defense attorneys criticized Adm. Woods's new rules, saying they could allow authorities to review drafts of legal motions or evidence they may wish to share with their clients.

"Our clients are being charged with capital offenses," said Cmdr. Stephen Reyes, a military attorney who is representing Mr. Nashiri. "They have to be certain that the attorney-client privilege is kept."

Cmdr. Reyes said he believed the new order applied to the Nashiri case. However, a Guantanamo spokeswoman said it didn't, because Mr. Nashiri is covered by Col. Pohl's ruling regarding his mail. Col. Pohl's ruling doesn't apply to other detainees, she said. The five detainees accused of planning the Sept. 11 attacks have no judge yet because charges against them haven't been finalized.

Adm. Woods's memorandum says the new rules are necessary for "safety and security" on the base. They define broad categories of information that detainees may not receive. However, the document also appears to include various exceptions.

The dispute is "symptomatic of the problems" created by military-commission trials, which Congress authorized to prosecute suspected terrorists without affording them rights required by federal courts, Cmdr. Reyes said. "Basic questions like this are already answered in federal court," he said. "Here, we're still arguing about it."

Write to Jess Bravin at jess.bravin@wsj.com

Will We Turn the UN Charter Into a Scrap of Paper?

By Howard Meyer

March 2003

http://historynewsservice.org/2003/03/will-we-turn-the-u-n-charter-into-a-scrap-of-paper/

“Just for a scrap of paper Great Britain [is] going to war,” Germany’s chancellor, Theobold von Bethmann-Hollweg complained as the First World War began. The “scrap of paper” was the treaty that Germany disregarded when it invaded Belgium.

Because of such dismissal of international agreements, the esteem that Germany had enjoyed until then among neutral nations quickly changed to hostility and fear. Britain and France exploited the “scrap of paper” remark in the United States, where there then was respect for international treaties, which the 1787 Constitution had elevated to the “supreme Law of the Land.”

Today we must ask, is the United States about to treat the Charter of the United Nations as a scrap of paper? We would be doing so if, without the authority of the U.N. Security Council, the administration were to launch American armed forces against Iraq.

Please read the rest of the article here.

See Doonesbury on Leaving Iraq here. -ed 

Signing Statement on the Budget Bill

Please read the post at the link below, Wells C. Bennett's excellent Lawfare Blog.  Congress is once again passing bills prohibiting the government from using Federal funds to transfer Guantanamo detainees to the US or other countries. Obama objects.

Congress's insistence on passing these bills is canny. It takes 2/3s of the Senate to override a law, and you know that that will not happen anytime soon. -ed

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/4567/

Text from the President's Signing Statement:

I have previously announced that it is the policy of my Administration, and in the interests of promoting transparency in Government, to indicate when a bill presented for Presidential signature includes provisions that are subject to well-founded constitutional objections. The Department of Justice has advised that a small number of provisions of H.R. 2055 raise constitutional concerns.

In this bill, the Congress has once again included provisions that would bar the use of appropriated funds for transfers of Guantanamo detainees into the United States (section 8119 of Division A), as well as transfers to the custody or effective control of foreign countries unless specified conditions are met (section 8120 of Division A). These provisions are similar to others found in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. My Administration has repeatedly communicated my objections to these provisions, including my view that they could, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles.  In approving this bill, I reiterate the objections my Administration has raised regarding these provisions, my intent to interpret and apply them in a manner that avoids constitutional conflicts, and the promise that my Administration will continue to work towards their repeal.

Christmas Thoughts for Omar Khadr, Still Held at Guantánamo

Please read the article on our worthy Andy Worthington's website.


http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/12/25/christmas-thoughts-for-omar-khadr-still-held-at-guantanamo/

It is also featured on the Eurasia Review site.

http://www.eurasiareview.com/25122011-christmas-thoughts-for-omar-khadr-still-held-at-guantanamo-oped/

A Chilling Dismissal

Judge dismisses ex-captive's damage suit

Likely an innocent man, Abdul Rahim Abdul Razak Al Janko was held for 7 years in Guantánamo. The judge's holding in this case should give anyone pause regardless of political orientation. First, the judge calls Janko's captivity mere collateral damage from a "war." A partisan group in Afghanistan had supported groups such as Al Qaeda. Afghanistan certainly hadn't declared war on the United States. The Declaration of War on Afghanistan, illegitimate as it was, has denied this man eight years of his life, and likely health problems that will shorten his life expectancy. His family's wellbeing has certainly suffered in his absence. That's a lot of damage. Federal Judge Richard Leon says, well, too bad so sad.

Janko's is a sorrowful tale. First he was captured and tortured by Al Qaeda, whose operatives accused him of being an American spy, then he was held at Guantánamo Bay from 2002 to 2009. 
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/24/2560370/judge-dismisses-ex-guantanamo.html#storylink=cpy 

"War, by its very nature, victimizes many of those caught in its wake. Innocent civilians are invariably killed, and sometimes even mistakenly imprisoned. Our legal system was never designed to provide a remedy in our Courts for these inevitable tragedies, especially in a conflict like this where terrorists cunningly morph into their surroundings."- Federal Judge Richard Leon.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/24/2560370/judge-dismisses-ex-guantanamo.html

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012: US Senate Removes Key Civil Liberties Protections from US Citizens

S.1867 passed on December 1, 2011, will live in infamy.

I popped off about it right away. US Senate Votes to Repeal Key Civil Liberties Act.

As did many other people who saw the same terrible things I did in this bill.

As of December 6, 2011, President Obama renewed his threat to veto the bill. Not because it was too broad, no. Rather, the veto threat comes because it did not give the Chief Executive enough discretion.

This came from a correspondent.
The movie "The Siege" is based on what can happen when the Posse Comitatus Act is overruled by the president.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133952/
it was made in 1998 and does a pretty good job of forecasting today's events.


Alternet: http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/742169/senate_approves_indefinite_military_detention_of_us_citizens_in_america/

The bill emerged from the Senate Armed services Committee without a hearing on the military detention provisions.

How convenient for the hawks!

Boumediene Resources 2011

Omar v. McHugh

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20FCO%2020110621232.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR