SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — A former driver for Osama Bin Laden may help decide the fate of dozens of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and perhaps all of them, as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on his legal challenge to the first US war crimes trials since World War II.
The court, which was expected to rule as early as today, is considering a range of issues in Salim Ahmed Hamdan’s case, including whether President Bush had the authority to order military trials for men captured in the war on terror and sent to the Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union said Friday that Bush doesn’t need a court decision to close the prison, which has drawn intense international criticism. “Bush can close Guantanamo, but this (court) decision can’t,” said Ben Wizner, an ACLU attorney who monitors Guantanamo.
The ruling, however, could determine whether the government can proceed with military trials for Hamdan and nine other detainees who have been charged with crimes. Prosecutors are preparing additional charges, including some that could incur the death penalty, Air Force Col. Morris Davis, the chief Guantanamo prosecutor, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from Washington. He added that about 65 more detainees are likely to be charged with crimes. “We’re pressing on, anticipating a favorable decision,” he said.
Hamdan’s attorneys argued that the conspiracy charge filed against him is not legitimate. The government has charged each of the 10 detainees with conspiracy. The government could “relatively quickly” file new charges to Hamdan such as aiding the enemy, Davis said. Hamdan, a 36-year-old native of Yemen, admits working as a driver for Bin Laden but denies conspiring to commit terrorist attacks on the United States. They also say he delivered weapons to members and associates of the terror network. He faces up to life in prison if convicted. His military-appointed attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr Charles Swift, said the lawsuit is aimed at moving the case to the civilian court system or to a traditional military court-martial. Lawyers for several defendants contend the tribunals lack guidelines and favor the prosecution. “This is about a fair trial, not a free pass,” Swift said.
The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether fair trial provisions of the Geneva Conventions apply to the military tribunals.
Another issue is whether the Supreme Court even has a say in the matter. The administration argues the Detainee Treatment Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by Bush on Dec. 30, strips the federal courts of much of their jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees.
