Learn from the mistakes of others

Monday, October 09, 2006
Joe Shaulis at 3:18 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Navy lawyer who successfully represented the plaintiff Guantanamo detainee in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive] and took his case all the way to the US Supreme Court has been denied a promotion and will leave the military by spring, the Miami Herald reports. Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift [profile], who has worked in the Department of Defense Office of Military Commissions [official website] since 2003, said he learned about two weeks after the Hamdan decision that he would not receive a promotion to commander. Because of the military's "up or out" promotion policy, Swift must retire, although he said he would continue to represent Salim Hamdan [Wikipedia profile], a Yemeni who worked as Osama bin Laden's driver, as a civilian attorney. Marine Col. Dwight Sullivan, chief defense counsel in the Office of Military Commissions, praised Swift's work as "really extraordinary" and said that the timing of the promotion decision was "quite a coincidence."

In the Hamdan case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bush administration's military commissions [JURIST news archive] for terrorism suspects lacked proper legal authorization [opinion text] as initially constituted, forcing the White House to win congressional approval of new legislation [JURIST report] setting up the commissions and defining appropriate procedures.

AP has more.

The Miami Herald has additional coverage. [JURIST] The US Navy lawyer who successfully represented the plaintiff Guantanamo detainee in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive] and took his case all the way to the US Supreme Court has been denied a promotion and will leave the military by spring, the Miami Herald reports. Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift [profile], who has worked in the Department of Defense Office of Military Commissions [official website] since 2003, said he learned about two weeks after the Hamdan decision that he would not receive a promotion to commander. Because of the military's "up or out" promotion policy, Swift must retire, although he said he would continue to represent Salim Hamdan [Wikipedia profile], a Yemeni who worked as Osama bin Laden's driver, as a civilian attorney. Marine Col. Dwight Sullivan, chief defense counsel in the Office of Military Commissions, praised Swift's work as "really extraordinary" and said that the timing of the promotion decision was "quite a coincidence."

In the Hamdan case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bush administration's military commissions [JURIST news archive] for terrorism suspects lacked proper legal authorization [opinion text] as initially constituted, forcing the White House to win congressional approval of new legislation [JURIST report] setting up the commissions and defining appropriate procedures.

AP has more.
The Miami Herald has additional coverage.

Monday, October 09, 2006
Joe Shaulis at 3:18 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Navy lawyer who successfully represented the plaintiff Guantanamo detainee in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive] and took his case all the way to the US Supreme Court has been denied a promotion and will leave the military by spring, the Miami Herald reports. Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift [profile], who has worked in the Department of Defense Office of Military Commissions [official website] since 2003, said he learned about two weeks after the Hamdan decision that he would not receive a promotion to commander. Because of the military's "up or out" promotion policy, Swift must retire, although he said he would continue to represent Salim Hamdan [Wikipedia profile], a Yemeni who worked as Osama bin Laden's driver, as a civilian attorney. Marine Col. Dwight Sullivan, chief defense counsel in the Office of Military Commissions, praised Swift's work as "really extraordinary" and said that the timing of the promotion decision was "quite a coincidence."

In the Hamdan case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bush administration's military commissions [JURIST news archive] for terrorism suspects lacked proper legal authorization [opinion text] as initially constituted, forcing the White House to win congressional approval of new legislation [JURIST report] setting up the commissions and defining appropriate procedures.

AP has more.

The Miami Herald has additional coverage. [JURIST] The US Navy lawyer who successfully represented the plaintiff Guantanamo detainee in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive] and took his case all the way to the US Supreme Court has been denied a promotion and will leave the military by spring, the Miami Herald reports. Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift [profile], who has worked in the Department of Defense Office of Military Commissions [official website] since 2003, said he learned about two weeks after the Hamdan decision that he would not receive a promotion to commander. Because of the military's "up or out" promotion policy, Swift must retire, although he said he would continue to represent Salim Hamdan [Wikipedia profile], a Yemeni who worked as Osama bin Laden's driver, as a civilian attorney. Marine Col. Dwight Sullivan, chief defense counsel in the Office of Military Commissions, praised Swift's work as "really extraordinary" and said that the timing of the promotion decision was "quite a coincidence."

In the Hamdan case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bush administration's military commissions [JURIST news archive] for terrorism suspects lacked proper legal authorization [opinion text] as initially constituted, forcing the White House to win congressional approval of new legislation [JURIST report] setting up the commissions and defining appropriate procedures.

AP has more.
The Miami Herald has additional coverage.

Australia AG insists Hicks military trial will not hear evidence coerced by torture
[JURIST] The US military commission expected to try Australian Guantanamo detainee David Hicks will not allow evidence coerced through torture, Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock told... [more].

Australia AG insists Hicks military trial will not hear evidence coerced by torture
[JURIST] The US military commission expected to try Australian Guantanamo detainee David Hicks will not allow evidence coerced through torture, Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock told... [more].

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Hicks lawyers may seek judicial review of UK decision not to press Gitmo release
Joe Shaulis at 1:55 PM ET

[JURIST] Lawyers for David Hicks [JURIST news archive; advocacy website], an Australian held by the US at the Guantanamo Bay detention center [JURIST news archive], may seek judicial review of the UK Foreign Office's decision not to petition the US for his release [JURIST report]. Hicks' Australian lawyer, David McLeod, said that another approach being considered is to press the Australian government into working for his release. Hicks faces a military commission on charges [PDF] of conspiracy to commit war crimes and attempted murder, but proceedings have been delayed pending the US Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST news archive], a case challenging the use of military commissions to try foreign terrorism suspects. A ruling could come this week.

Hicks, who was captured in 2001 while allegedly fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan and has been detained at Guantanamo since then, won a court ruling [JURIST report] earlier this year entitling him British citizenship based on his mother's nationality. The UK has already secured the release of several other British citizens and is negotiating for the release of noncitizen residents [JURIST report], but said Monday that it will not press for Hicks' release as he was an Australian citizen when he was taken into custody.

In other reaction to Monday's decision, Amnesty International [advocacy website] expressed disappointment that the UK would not push for Hicks' release and blamed the Australian government [ABC report] for not doing enough. Hicks' father, Terry, also lamented [ABC report] the Australian government's handling of the case.

Australia's ABC News has more. The Sydney Morning Herald has additional coverage.

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Hicks lawyers may seek judicial review of UK decision not to press Gitmo release
Joe Shaulis at 1:55 PM ET

[JURIST] Lawyers for David Hicks [JURIST news archive; advocacy website], an Australian held by the US at the Guantanamo Bay detention center [JURIST news archive], may seek judicial review of the UK Foreign Office's decision not to petition the US for his release [JURIST report]. Hicks' Australian lawyer, David McLeod, said that another approach being considered is to press the Australian government into working for his release. Hicks faces a military commission on charges [PDF] of conspiracy to commit war crimes and attempted murder, but proceedings have been delayed pending the US Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST news archive], a case challenging the use of military commissions to try foreign terrorism suspects. A ruling could come this week.

Hicks, who was captured in 2001 while allegedly fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan and has been detained at Guantanamo since then, won a court ruling [JURIST report] earlier this year entitling him British citizenship based on his mother's nationality. The UK has already secured the release of several other British citizens and is negotiating for the release of noncitizen residents [JURIST report], but said Monday that it will not press for Hicks' release as he was an Australian citizen when he was taken into custody.

In other reaction to Monday's decision, Amnesty International [advocacy website] expressed disappointment that the UK would not push for Hicks' release and blamed the Australian government [ABC report] for not doing enough. Hicks' father, Terry, also lamented [ABC report] the Australian government's handling of the case.

Australia's ABC News has more. The Sydney Morning Herald has additional coverage.

Saturday, April 08, 2006
Pentagon rules thwart fair trials for Guantanamo detainees: US military lawyer
Greg Sampson at 11:21 AM ET

[JURIST] A US military lawyer acting as defense counsel for a Yemeni prisoner on trial for terrorism-related offenses before a military commission [DOD backgrounder; JURIST news archive] at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] on Friday challenged a US Department of Defense regulation that says that only military attorneys with security clearances are allowed to see secret documents relating to their cases, effectively precluding detainees from representing themselves. Army Maj. Tom Fleener [Wikipedia profile] said that self-representation was recognized as a right by virtually every court in the world, and argued that "the secretary of defense and his delegees [sic] have messed this thing up" by enforcing procedural rules that make impossible a fair trial of detainees as mandated by presidential order.

Defendant Ali Hamza al-Bahlul has been directly tied to Osama bin Laden. Al-Bahlul has been boycotting his trial [JURIST report] since the military commissions resumed in January after a year-long hiatus. In March he specifically claimed that no "enemy" US military lawyer could represent him, demanding instead that he be allowed to defend himself or hire a Yemeni lawyer.

Reuters has more.

Saturday, April 08, 2006
Pentagon rules thwart fair trials for Guantanamo detainees: US military lawyer
Greg Sampson at 11:21 AM ET

[JURIST] A US military lawyer acting as defense counsel for a Yemeni prisoner on trial for terrorism-related offenses before a military commission [DOD backgrounder; JURIST news archive] at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] on Friday challenged a US Department of Defense regulation that says that only military attorneys with security clearances are allowed to see secret documents relating to their cases, effectively precluding detainees from representing themselves. Army Maj. Tom Fleener [Wikipedia profile] said that self-representation was recognized as a right by virtually every court in the world, and argued that "the secretary of defense and his delegees [sic] have messed this thing up" by enforcing procedural rules that make impossible a fair trial of detainees as mandated by presidential order.

Defendant Ali Hamza al-Bahlul has been directly tied to Osama bin Laden. Al-Bahlul has been boycotting his trial [JURIST report] since the military commissions resumed in January after a year-long hiatus. In March he specifically claimed that no "enemy" US military lawyer could represent him, demanding instead that he be allowed to defend himself or hire a Yemeni lawyer.

Reuters has more.