The United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia said that the crimes made by Salim Hamdan, who was the driver and body
guard for Osama Bin Laden, stated that the accusations of “providing material
support for terrorism” was not a valid charge because at the time the crimes
were committed it was not yet an international war crime. This is a “set back”
for the broader military commissions system. Due to other members
of terrorism training camp that supported Al Qaida this will likely be the same
ruling for their cases as well. Mr. Hamden was convicted of providing material
support for terrorism in 2008 and sentenced to 66 years in prison, but his
lawyers challenged his verdict until it got to the United States Court of
Appeals.
The government is also trying to
make the courts closed that no news or video reports would be allowed inside.
Civilian lawyers are fighting against this saying that they are trying to hide
how the terrorist feel or how they remembered being treated by the C. I. A.
interrogation practices.
It is
questionable to whether or not providing material support for terrorism and
conspiracy to aid terrorism are offenses under the laws of armed conflict.
Another member of Al Qaida, Ali al Bahlul, was convicted of providing material
support terrorism and conspiracy charges in 2008 and is likely going to have
his case reviewed in the United States Court of Appeals as well.
These
technicalities are no reason for these people who were active members of a
terrorist organization to be excused of their involvement in the terrorist
organization. These are just loop holes that lawyers are taking to get their
clients ruling overturned. Once a verdict has been reached it is unfair to
overturn it because of a technicality. If it was wrong then, it is still wrong
today.
10/19/12 10:43 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment