A Dangerous New Order - New York Times
The New York Times

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 19, 2006
Editorial
A Dangerous New Order

Once President Bush signed the new law on military tribunals, administration
officials and Republican leaders in Congress wasted no time giving Americans
a taste of the new order created by this unconstitutional act.

Within hours, Justice Department lawyers notified the federal courts that
they no longer had the authority to hear pending lawsuits filed by attorneys
on
behalf of inmates of the penal camp at Guantánamo Bay. They cited passages
in the bill that suspend the fundamental principle of habeas corpus, making
Mr. Bush the first president since the Civil War to take that undemocratic
step.

Not satisfied with having won the vote, Dennis Hastert, the speaker of the
House, quickly issued a statement accusing Democrats who opposed the
Military
Commissions Act of 2006 of putting "their liberal agenda ahead of the
security of America." He said the Democrats "would gingerly pamper the
terrorists
who plan to destroy innocent Americans' lives" and create "new rights for
terrorists."

This nonsense is part of the Republicans' scare-America-first strategy for
the elections. No Democrat advocated pampering terrorists - gingerly or
otherwise
- or giving them new rights. Democratic amendments to the bill sought to
protect everyone's right to a fair trial while providing a legal way to
convict
terrorists.

Americans will hear more of this ahead of the election. They also will hear
Mr. Bush say that he finally has the power to bring to justice a handful of
men behind the 9/11 attacks. The truth is that Mr. Bush could have done that
long ago, but chose to detain them illegally at hidden C.I.A. camps to
extract
information. He sent them to Guantánamo only to stampede Congress into
passing the new law.

The 60 or so men at Guantánamo who are now facing tribunals - out of about
450 inmates - also could have been tried years ago if Mr. Bush had not
rebuffed
efforts by Congress to create suitable courts. He imposed a system of
kangaroo courts that was more about expanding his power than about combating
terrorism.

While the Republicans pretend that this bill will make America safer, let's
be clear about its real dangers. It sets up a separate system of justice for
any foreigner whom Mr. Bush chooses to designate as an "illegal enemy
combatant." It raises insurmountable obstacles for prisoners to challenge
their detentions.
It does not require the government to release prisoners who are not being
charged, or a prisoner who is exonerated by the tribunals.

The law does not apply to American citizens, but it does apply to other
legal United States residents. And it chips away at the foundations of the
judicial
system in ways that all Americans should find threatening. It further
damages the nation's reputation and, by repudiating key protections of the
Geneva
Conventions, it needlessly increases the danger to any American soldier
captured in battle.

In the short run, voters should see through the fog created by the
Republican campaign machine. It will be up to the courts to repair the harm
this law
has done to the Constitution.

Copyright 2006
The New York Times Company

Posted by Miriam V.