WASHINGTON — President-elect Obama's advisers are quietly crafting a proposal to ship dozens, if not hundreds, of imprisoned terrorism suspects to the United States to face criminal trials, a plan that would make good on his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison but could require creation of a controversial new system of justice.
During his campaign, Obama described Guantanamo as a "sad chapter in American history" and has said generally that the U.S. legal system is equipped to handle the detainees. But he has offered few details on what he planned to do once the facility is closed.
The plan being developed by Obama's team has been championed by legal scholars from both political parties. But it is almost certain to face opposition from Republicans who oppose bringing terrorism suspects to the U.S. and from Democrats who oppose creating a new court system with fewer rights for detainees.
What does Catholic Social Teaching have to say about this?
First of all, the Church recognizes the responsibility of the State to defend its citizens, but insists that
In a State ruled by law the power to inflict punishment is correctly entrusted to the Courts; 'In defining the proper relationships between the legislative, executive and judicial powers, the Constitutions of modern States guarantee the judicial power the necessary independence in the realm of law.' (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church at Para. 402, quoting JPII's Address to the Italian Association of Judges)(emphasis in original).
Further,
In carrying out investigations, the regulation against the use of torture, even in the case of serious crimes, must be strictly observed: 'Christ's disciple refuses every recourse to such methods, which nothing could justify and in which the dignity of man is as much debased in his torturer as in the torturer's victim.'
Likewise ruled out is 'the use of detention for the sole purpose of trying to obtain significant information for the trial.' Moreover, it must be ensured that 'trials are conducted swiftly: their excessive length is becoming intolerable for citizens and results in real injustice.'" Id. at Para 404 (emphasis added).
Now, you might ask, isn't Terrorism different? NO.
This right [to defend oneself from terrorism] cannot be exercised in the absence of moral and legal norms, because the struggle against terrorists must be carried out with respect for human rights and for the principles of a State ruled by law. The identification of the guilty party must be duly proven, because criminal responsibility is always personal, and therefore cannot be extended to the religions, nations or ethnic groups to which the terrorists belong.
Why? In addition to the moral requirement to respect the dignity of all human beings . . .
The recruitment of terrorists in fact is easier in situations where rights are trampled and injustices are tolerated over a long period of time." Id at Para 514.
If you read Justice Kennedy's Majority opinion from the Boumediene decision, you'll see that the ruling is fully in line with all of these principles that the Church insists upon.
The four Justices who dissented? Sadly,Four Catholics appointed by Republican Presidents.
The Bush/Cheney Administration created a legal black-hole/hell-hole where people (some or many of whom may very well be innocent) are indefinitely and without any legal recourse deprived of their liberty (and sometimes their very lives).
Hopefully the incoming Obama/Biden Administration will carry through and implement what the Supreme Court has recognized the Constitution requires and the Church has recognized the Faith requires: Due Process and Justice for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment