(New York, June 12, 2002) President Bush's unilateral designation of Abdullah al-Mujahir as an "enemy combatant" creates a dangerous loophole that threatens basic criminal justice guarantees, Human Rights Watch said today.
US: Growing Problem of Guantanamo Detainees
September 11 Attacks: Crimes Against Humanity
"There should be a strong presumption that anyone arrested in the United States, far from any battlefield, be granted the full legal protections of the criminal justice system-including the right to counsel and not to be held without charges. Simply accusing someone of working with al-Qaeda does not justify throwing him into a navy brig."
"The president is claiming unfettered power to circumvent the justice system and its safeguards of basic rights," said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. "There should be a strong presumption that anyone arrested in the United States, far from any battlefield, be granted the full legal protections of the criminal justice system-including the right to counsel and not to be held without charges. Simply accusing someone of working with al-Qaeda does not justify throwing him into a navy brig."
According to U.S. officials, al-Mujahir, originally named Jose Padilla, had met with senior al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and Afghanistan to plan attacks in the United States, including the detonation of a radioactive "dirty bomb." Al-Mujahir was detained in Chicago on May 8, and then held in New York as a "material witness." This week he was sent to a military base in South Carolina where the U.S. government is holding him as an "enemy combatant" without charges or access to an attorney.
Human Rights Watch noted the contrast between the government's decision to treat al-Mujahir as an enemy combatant and its decision to prosecute the alleged September 11 "twentieth hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui, on criminal charges in a federal district court. Both men allegedly came to the United States to carry out acts of violence at the direction of Afghanistan-based al-Qaeda operatives. "The U.S. government apparently wants to be able to question al-Mujahir while holding him incommunicado," said Roth. "But the government's legitimate desire to obtain information about terrorist threats does not entitle the president to assume unlimited powers to place in military custody anyone he identifies as a terrorist."
Human Rights Watch questions the government's contention that international humanitarian law - or the laws of war - permits the president to unilaterally designate al-Mujahir an "enemy combatant" who may be held by the military without charges or access to an attorney. International humanitarian law applies to the international armed conflict in Afghanistan, but it does not apply to any and all members of al-Qaeda regardless of their individual involvement with that conflict. To maintain its designation
of al-Mujahir as an enemy combatant, the U.S. government would need to demonstrate to a civilian court a clear nexus between his activities and the armed conflict with the United States in Afghanistan. If a court determines he is an enemy combatant, then he may be detained without charges for the duration of active hostilities, but not indefinitely.
If suspects are apprehended outside areas of armed conflict and have no direct connection to the conflict, international humanitarian law is inapplicable. Instead, the protections of international human rights law apply. In the case of a U.S. citizen detained in the United States, the protections of U.S. constitutional law apply as well. These protections include the rights to be formally charged and permitted access to counsel.
"To permit a government that is at war in one part of the world to place people in military custody without charges elsewhere in the world without demonstrating participation in the armed conflict would create a gaping and dangerous loophole to basic human rights guarantees," Roth said. "Being an accused terrorist is not synonymous with being an enemy combatant. Otherwise, the president could detain and hold anyone without charges simply by labeling him a member of al-Qaeda."
USA is doing today in the name of enduring and protecting democracy and freedom what the Taliban did in the name of Islam. These are such acts which will boomerang on their faces; like it happened to Talibans. America was the supporter of Taliban. Now they are against them. You can't be a friend of such a person who is so much self centered and who can cut your neck when it suits his purpose.
As a staunch supporter of Islam, I must say that I was the one who realised the dangers of Talibans when they entered the political scene in 1996 taking over Kabul. They did not understand the True Religion brought to us by Holy Prophet-Muhammad (peace be upon him). The harsh treatment with women, lack of respect to humans who are all vicegerents of Almighty Allah, lack of actions and knowledge to Govern a country having different ethinic people and failure to join them together with the love and guidance of Islam all these failures brought down their regime and dreadful and ignoble movement.The Ulema of Pakistan (jamiat ulema party leadership) expedited their downfall by their misguidance and arrogance. Had they been true muslims, they would have sacrificed their lives to safeguard the Justice, Humanity and Mercy of Allah as shown in the Holy Quran for all people whose Real Lord and Master is only Allah. We being only the servants and we don't have any authority over a person, man or woman, british or american and they must have struggled to uphold the justice of Allah and tribal mentality. They have paid the price. Now will we, our Leaders, Scholars, preach the True, Loving message of Islam or continue Supporting Taliban's misdeeds? I think there is no muslim person who suppots now their misdeeds.
Allah-The Lord of the World will judge the people and now is the time for all people to make a decision before Allah makes His Decision soon, Insha Allah that either you are with Allah or against Him, His Laws (of Holy Qur-an or Shariah) and Islam as a total.
article. The President should put the charge
then proceed through the legal system of courts.
The person charged with should have right to get
a Counsel to defend his rights. Otherwise a dangerous precedent will be set for future violations of human rights.