In case any of you missed it, news that the Obama administration has decided to continue the Bush administration's detainee policy in Afghanistan has not gone over very well with human rights groups. According to the various reports, more than 600 prisoners are being kept without the right to trial in the Bagram prison in Afghanistan. The prison is, in fact, being expanded to accomodate many more detainees, who likely will come from Guantanamo.
The decision to deny prisoners in Afghanistan any right to access the US legal system to challenge their detentions, seems, according to some analysts, to run contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that to hold prisoners in Guantanamo Bay without access to the U.S. legal system is unconstitutional. Thus the decision by President Obama to close the prison in Guantanamo Bay in a year is rendered totally meaningless if the prisoners there are simply transferred to Afghanistan, where they will even have fewer rights. There are several stories about this issue on the web - see The Raw Story at http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_continues_Bush_policy_at_Afghan_0221.html for one of these.
This to me is another example of the disconnect between the rhetoric and reality of the Obama administration, and the continued refusal of many Obama supporters to acknowledge it. Sean Penn's Oscar acceptance speech is yet another example. Mr. Penn was at the same time able to condemn those protesting gay marriage as promoters of hate while praising Americans for electing President Obama - a person who also opposes gay marriage. For the record, I support gay marriage. I also support the rights of detainees, whether held in the US, Guantanamo Bay, or Afghanistan, to be accorded their constitutional due process rights.If the candidate whom I supported for President took the opposite point of view on these fundamental issues of human rights, I would not hesitate to call him on it. I hope the Obama supporters will eventually do the same thing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
For Obama supporters to call him out on things would require them to actually monitor him and his administration. Its much more fun to dwell on the meanings of his triumph. This is why I'm a supporter of the monarchy. Give yourself a figurehead at the top of the political chain to house adoration and reflect the nation's "conscience", but don't let them actually make any decisions.
ReplyDelete"This to me is another example of the disconnect between the rhetoric and reality of the [fill in blank with name of politician of your choice] administration, and the continued refusal of many [politician of choice] supporters to acknowledge it."
ReplyDeleteHi Professor Klar,
ReplyDeleteI think every time I post a comment on here my grade in your class sinks lower.
YET I KEEP TALKING: the US and Canadian treatment of detainees makes me ashamed of both countries. I totally agree with your assessment of the immorality of the current situation and President Obama's equivocations.
I used to read the inside of my passport-- the part that says the the Queen will afford me all her protection-- and I'd feel safe abroad. Since the Arar inquiry, I don't have the same faith in the country or its Charter.
I also agree that President Obama's actions are far from his supporters' notions of what kind of'change he bring. As a constitutional law professor, he should know that many of these actions are flat-out illegal. His answers to Boston Globe reporter Charlie Savage's national security questionnaire were pretty straight-forward, and many of his supporters thought he'd make more sweeping changes. They were wrong.
But Senator McCain trades in the same equivocations. After years of proclaiming his opposition to torture both in the press and in some legislation (all gutted President Bush's signing statements), he voted against the bill to stop CIA torture by limiting all branches of the federal government to the Army Field Manual on interrogation.
If you can stand to read the whole thing without thinking "This is the end of America," Jane Mayer's book "The Dark Side" has a very detailed, well-sourced chronicle of the descent into torture and how the key players were mostly lawyers, like David Addington and John Yoo.
The only bright light in this is that Marty Lederman is the new head of the Office of Legal Counsel, the branch of the DoJ responsible for drafting interpretations of the law that are binding on the rest of the federal government. He is a vociferous critic of Addington/Yoo and their coterie. To get a sense of what vile people these are, see this exchange between John Yoo and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. John Conyers, esp. the question at ~1:25: Could the President order a suspect buried alive?
(Typo: I meant to say that Senator McCain's early anti-torture efforts were gutted BY President Bush's signing statements).
ReplyDelete