CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
Military Commission Judge Finds Torture-Extracted Confession InadmissibleYesterday, for the first time, a U.S. military judge at Guantánamo ruled that a prisoner's confession was extracted through torture, as defined by the Military Commission Rules of Evidence. The judge barred the government from using the detainee's confession as evidence during a military commission trial. The judge made the ruling in the case of Mohammad Jawad, an Afghan citizen who was a juvenile when he was captured in December 2002. He is accused of throwing a grenade and wounding two U.S. soldiers and their Afghan interpreter. After his capture, Jawad was interrogated by armed Afghan officials who, as Jawad stated in a September 2008 declaration admitted as evidence, threatened to kill Jawad and his family. The decision states: During the interrogation, someone told the Accused, "You will be killed if you do not confess to the grenade attack," and, "We will arrest your family and kill them if you do not confess," or words to that effect. The speaker meant what he said; it was a credible threat.In his ruling, the judge, Army Col. Stephen Henley, also indicated that there was reason to believe that Jawad was under the influence of drugs at the time of his forced confession. Jawad was subsequently turned over to U.S. forces and transferred to Guantánamo where he has been detained since the beginning of 2003, and where he was also subjected to cruelty and abuse, including through the euphemistically-named "frequent flyer program." The Jawad case has been the center of much attention lately. You may recall that the lead prosecutor in the case, Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, resigned in September because he believed that he could not ethically proceed with the case. An Associated Press story on the ruling quoted the ACLU's Hina Shamsi, who has monitored numerous military commission proceedings at Guantánamo, including the hearing that led to the judge's decision yesterday: Hina Shamsi, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, welcomed the ruling, but alleged "evidence obtained through torture and coercion is pervasive in military commission cases that, by design, disregard the most fundamental due process rights, and no single decision can cure that."Jawad's statements in Afghan custody were key to the government's case against him. Now that we know how those statements were obtained, the question is if and how the case can fairly proceed. Stay tuned.
Tags: Col. Stephen Henley, Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, Maj. David Frakt, Mohammed Jawad, national security project
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
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. 1 Response to "Military Commission Judge Finds Torture-Extracted Confession Inadmissible" |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Nov 19th, 2008 at 10:44am
It's strange to think that this still happens. But why do certain authorities still feel the need to invent 'frequent flyer programs'?
Is it an ego thing - that they arrested someone and want to be proved right.
Or is that scapegoating - the pressure from media/politicians being so much that they would much rather arrest an innocent and close the case than do a proper investigation.
Either way, it is a product of a finger pointing "I'm always right" society and what we see here are just the symptoms of a bigger disease. More transparency helps of course but that's not all we need to do. We need to start doing the 'right' thing without fear of repercussions and show a little humility when we don't know the answer.