Margaret Warner of the
Lehrer Hews Hour discussed the
proposal reported in the Washington Post to build prisons for house suspected terrorists who cannot prove innocence with two attorneys, David Cole and John Yoo. Some of these people could face lifetime detention.
The Washington Post reports that at least some details of the proposal "originated with the State department"
"One proposal under review is the transfer of large numbers of Afghan, Saudi and Yemeni detainees from the military's Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center into new U.S.-built prisons in their home countries. The prisons would be operated by those countries, but the State Department, where this idea originated, would ask them to abide by recognized human rights standards and would monitor compliance, the senior administration official said."
The Supreme Court decision and the administration's legal rational can be found in
this diary.
According to John Yoo, all the detainees involved have been classified as "enemy combatants" who traditionally have not received trials, and that under the laws of war, these people can be detained until the end of the conflict.
Apparently, the administration follows the laws of war when it suits them, and ignores these laws, ie Geneva Conventions, when they become inconvenient. David Cole criticized the administration:
I think we've had problems from the beginning with how we detain them. What did we do? We threw out the Geneva Conventions. We have problems with: How do we interrogate them? What did we do? We threw out the convention against torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. Now we have a problem with detaining them for long periods of time. We want to throw out the prohibition on indefinite detention without trial or charges.
He characterized such policies as the "exertion of maximum power." It would be one thing, says Cole, if the administration meant the end of the conflict with Al Queda, but they have argued that these people can be held until the end of the war on terrorism, likely to never happen.
Yoo continued that the detainee can be divided into two groups, the people held at Guantanamo against whom there is no evidence, and the twelve or so high level Al Queda operatives captured during 2002 and 2003 and held by the CIA overseas. Yoo said that although the Supreme Court ruled that enemy combatants are entitled to a hearing, the ruling pertained only to the Guantanamo detainees, not the Al Queda operatives. The Supreme court also "didn't say what that hearing would be like." Yoo rejected the argument that enemy combatant would be held indefinitely, saying that "indefinite was the wrong word to use, and that the conflict with Al Queda "is indefinite, but not forever."
Cole believes the administration does not want to try enemy combatants because their public testimony is likely to embarrass the administration when they report how they were treated. Yoo disagrees, saying that while the US is engaged in war, their public testimony could reveal sensitive information that might compromise the war effort, therefore their trials will have to wait until the war is over.
