CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
Gitmo Chief at Odds With DOJ?
The Miami Herald (and, apparently, the Saudi Press Agency) interviewed Rear Admiral Harry Harris (seriously, Harry Harris?), commander of the Gitmo detention facility, about the DOJ's proposed restrictions on access to counsel for the detainees. I must say, the Admiral's retraction, if it is one, is awfully vague.
The Justice Department, in a filing with the federal circuit court of appeals, has argued that visits by civilian lawyers and attorney-client mail have caused ``intractable problems and threats to security at Guantánamo.'' It proposes limiting each detainee to three visits with a civilian attorney. That effort has roiled America's legal establishment, drawing condemnation from newspaper editorials, the American Bar Association and other legal groups. A hearing is scheduled later this month at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. But in an interview with The Miami Herald and Saudi Press Agency on Wednesday evening, Rear Adm. Harry Harris, the commander, was supportive of the ongoing meetings between detainees and lawyers, known as habeas corpus counsel. He said they contributed to an image of transparency at the prison camps on this remote U.S. Navy base in southeast Cuba.Um, yeah, and just withdrawing the DOJ petition would contribute even more to "transparency." Unfortunately, even with effective access to counsel, you're still stuck with the legal black hole problem. And I hear it's tough for something to be transparent when even light can't resist its gravitational pull. I learned that last bit on Star Trek (TOS, not TNG).
Tags: Close Guantanamo, detention, findhabeas, national security project |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites.
We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published.
Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section.