U.S. Drops Title of "Enemy Combatant" on Gitmo Detainees
As reported by TPM, the Justice Department just released this:
In a filing today with the federal District Court for the District of Columbia, the Department of Justice submitted a new standard for the government's authority to hold detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility. The definition does not rely on the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief independent of Congress's specific authorization. It draws on the international laws of war to inform the statutory authority conferred by Congress. It provides that individuals who supported al Qaeda or the Taliban are detainable only if the support was substantial. And it does not employ the phrase "enemy combatant."
This is huge. Since symbols and words matter, it shows the Justice Dept. is willing to take yet another step to shed the Bush Administration's reckless "with us or against us" position, and perhaps (maybe....HOPEFULLY) end years and years of withholding prisoners indefinitely without trial.
Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic adds this:
Congress's 2001 resolution authorizing military force against Al Qaeda and the Taliban grants the president power to detain prisoners currently held at Guantanamo Bay, Attorney General Eric Holder said today, stripping away claims by the Bush Administration that the president's exexutive authority inherently provided for such detentions.
Thank goodness. It's Congress and the LAW that dictates such policies, and not a unitary executive branch that decides it can enforce whatever it wants to.
Of course, none of that seemed to matter to the Associated Press. Here's what they just wrote about it:
The Obama administration is trying to protect top Bush administration military officials from lawsuits brought by prisoners who say they were tortured while being held at Guantanamo Bay.
The Justice Department argued in a filing Thursday with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that holding military officials liable for their treatment of prisoners could cause them to make future decisions based on fear of litigation rather than appropriate military policy.
Huh? That doesn't seem to jive at all with, um, the same filing that the DOJ just released! Take a look again!
The Department also submitted a declaration by Attorney General Eric Holder stating that, under executive orders issued by President Obama, the government is undertaking an interagency review of detention policy for individuals captured in armed conflicts or counterterrorism operations as well as a review of the status of each detainee held at Guantanamo. The outcome of those reviews may lead to further refinements of the government's position as it develops a comprehensive policy.
So let's get this straight, AP: The Obama Administration is trying to remove the labels of "enemy combatant", conduct a thorough review of detainees and policies at Guantanamo.....but they're ALSO trying to protect those who were responsible for the crimes there? Whew, glad THAT'S cleared up!
Accountability is coming to Washington.
Oh this is a good day indeed.
**************************
Cross-posted at Daily Kos
Since I happen to have this open, I'm quoting the relevant articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
From: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html#a1
This is a good place to start. It's language we can all understand. It shows us how far we've strayed from universal rights for the folks we detained for so long.
Excellent blog.
And yes, very troubling to see the Obama administration tap-dancing to protect bushco.
March 13, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure they're actually tap dancing to protect Bush. It sounds more to me like they're undermining each of his torture policies -- albeit perhaps not as quickly as I'd like, but they're doing SOMETHING.
March 13, 2009 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama administration may be tap-dancing, but it isn't to protect the previous administration. It is not the responsibility of a sitting president to prosecute the previous president, This is clearly the duty of Congress, and if Congressional members are unwilling to do the right thing, then they should at the very least, set up a truly independent panel to investigate.
Obama has to be very careful that he does not throw out the baby with the bathwater, The President, one individual, is invested with 1/3 of our Constitutional Government's Powers. These powers were abused, and overreached by GW Bush, but the ultimate responsibility for this lies with We, The People, who elected (well sort-of), and then, even more blameworthy, re-elected DubyaDim, The Son of Bush. Obama has a duly sworn Constitutional duty to protect the rightful Powers of the Executive Branch, and he has a duty to repudiate the past Administration's immoral and unlawful acts. That is the extent of his responsibility in this matter.
March 13, 2009 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wholly agree with you PCA. As much as I want to see the Bush Administration held to account for all transgressions, it is Congress who bears the responsibility to make it happen. I see this news today as Obama helping to set the table and thus perhaps lend context to the discussion, but it will ultimately be Congress' job to pick up the ball and run with it. And I hope they do just that.
March 13, 2009 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I definitely agree with all your comments, PCA.
What concerns me is the claiming of rights by Obama. The sense that if he does not claim them, they will lapse.
I fear he is trying to position himself in case he needs certain rights.
But we shall see.
March 13, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post in haste. Repent at leisure. (I am repenting!)
March 13, 2009 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
No worries, it was your gut reaction.
March 13, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
This move is wonderful, not calling them "enemy combatants." At the same time I'm concerned about some of the powers Obama is claiming. Like the signing statement gutting whistle-blower protection. And some of the claims re intelligence gathering and so on. (but that was outside your post)
Anyway, thanks for your kindness. :)
March 13, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
This emptywheel thread is a must read in my view. It shows that the Obama administration is still claiming a great deal of presidential authority to detain people without charge, no matter what the term used:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/03/13/and-it-does-not-employ-the-phrase-enemy-combatant/
Today's NY Times makes similar points. I'm still concerned about the Rule of Law here.
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/14/us/politics/14gitmo.html?_r=1&hp
March 14, 2009 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love good news Super. Check the sources. Cross reference. Good good good job!!
March 13, 2009 9:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
This thread at emptywheel pertains. And actually backs up my comments. (Now I don't feel so off the wall)
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/03/13/pixie-dust-and-cheneys-assassination-squads/
Especially note comments by "Mary" - but others as well. Second half of thread gets into this same topic. But it's disconcerting as heck.
Take a look. Definitely worth it. Prepare to read!
March 13, 2009 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink