Guantanamo Bay and the United States Military Commissions: The Perplexities of Trial and Punishment by the Laws of War

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm B Savage
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Military ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
Military Commissions

UPDATE ON UNITED STATES MILITARY COMMISSIONS

2007 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 198-231
Author(s):  
Sarah Finnin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Military ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Military Commissions ◽  
The Military

AbstractThis article provides a detailed update on the progress of the United States military commissions under the regime established by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 for the trial of detainees captured during the War on Terror for so-called war crimes. In particular, the author examines the plea and sentencing of Australian detainee David Hicks, the pre-trial developments in the case of Canadian detainee Omar Khadr, and the early litigation involving the detainees who have been dubbed the ‘September 11 co-conspirators’. The author also touches on the Supreme Court decision inHamdanv.Rumsfeld, some of the significant features of the Military Commission Act, the recent federal court litigation in the case ofBoumedienev.Bush, and the construction of the new military commission building at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base.

Drinking from a Poisoned Chalice

2020 ◽  
pp. 519-534
Author(s):  
John G. Baker ◽  
Mary E. Spears ◽  
Katherine S. Newell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
United States Military ◽  
George Washington ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Keynote Speech ◽  
Military Commissions ◽  
Washington University

The following is an adaptation of the keynote speech given by John G. Baker at the 2018 NATSECDEF Conference, “Preserving Justice in National Security,” hosted by the George Washington University Law School on September 20, 2018. Brigadier General Baker examined whether the United States military commissions, special military tribunals established by President George W. Bush in the aftermath of 9/11 solely to try noncitizen terrorism suspects, were capable of achieving justice. Answering with an empathetic “no,” Brigadier General Baker described an increasingly troubling series of actions taken against defendants who had been secretly held and tortured by the same government that was then seeking their criminal convictions and executions. It is clear from this speech that by the time this piece is published, more, and possibly more troubling events, will have occurred, as the United States continues to pay the price of torture.

Litigating National Security Cases under The United States Uniform Code of Military Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 250-274
Author(s):  
Lieutenant Commander Ursula Smith ◽  
Colonel Daniel J. Lecce
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
National Security ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Military ◽  
Military Rule ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
Uniform Code ◽  
Military Commissions

This paper will discuss classified litigation procedures in United States Military Courts-Martial, governed by Military Rule of Evidence 505 and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The differences between United States Federal Court procedures and United States Military Commissions, governed by the Classified Information Privilege Act (cipa) and Military Commissions Rule of Evidence 505, are also discussed. Finally, best practices and selected military cases regarding espionage are presented.

The Use of Military Commissions to Prosecute Individuals Accused of Terrorist Acts

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 320-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Military Commissions ◽  
Terrorist Acts ◽  
The Military

In the wake of the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, a variety of proposals emerged for bringing the perpetrators tojustice. These proposals included the use of courts-martial, the creation of a special tribunal (whether under the auspices of the United Nations or otherwise), and prosecution in U.S. federal courts.1 On November 13, 2001, President George W. Bush issued a military order entitled "Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism" (Military Order).2 Pursuant to the Military Order, the United States may establish military commissions to prosecute terrorists for violations of the laws of war and "other applicable laws."

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document