International Herald Tribune Editorial - The Padilla trial
International Herald Tribune Editorial - The Padilla trial
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: March 1, 2007
There were so many reasons to be appalled by President George W. Bush's decision to detain people illegally and subject them to mental and physical abuse. The unfolding case of José Padilla reminds us of one of the most important: mistreating a prisoner makes it hard, if not impossible, for a real court to judge whether he has committed real crimes.
Padilla is a former Chicago gang member whose arrest in 2002 was touted by the Bush administration as the disruption of a high-level plot by Al Qaeda to set off a "dirty bomb" in the United States. He was held without charge for three years and eight months in a Navy brig, his windows blackened, his every move watched.
Then, rather than defend its actions before the Supreme Court, the White House declared a year ago that Padilla was no longer an illegal combatant, transferred him to civilian custody and filed conspiracy charges that have nothing to do with dirty bombs.
On Wednesday, a judge in Miami ruled against Padilla's defense lawyers, who argued that his abusive confinement was so traumatic that he could not assist them in a trial.
That still leaves the far bigger question of whether Padilla was tortured, as he has claimed. For there to be a trial, the judge will have to rule that Padilla was not tortured, and she made a point of saying Wednesday that her ruling on his competence was not a judgment on the torture claim.
The government's arguments at the hearing sounded ridiculous and shameful. Prosecutors said Padilla always seemed fine to his jailers, though they did things like standing on his bare feet with boots so they could shackle him. The brig psychologist testified that he had spoken to Padilla only twice, once when he was first detained, and two years later — through a slit in his cell door.
When a psychologist testified for the defense that Padilla was "an anxiety-ridden, broken individual," the prosecution said her tests were invalid — because the jailers had kept Padilla handcuffed throughout.
We will probably never know if Padilla was a would-be terrorist. So far, this trial has been a reminder of how Bush's policy on prisoners has compromised the judicial process. And it has confirmed the world's suspicions of the United States' stooping to the very behavior it once stood against.
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: March 1, 2007
There were so many reasons to be appalled by President George W. Bush's decision to detain people illegally and subject them to mental and physical abuse. The unfolding case of José Padilla reminds us of one of the most important: mistreating a prisoner makes it hard, if not impossible, for a real court to judge whether he has committed real crimes.
Padilla is a former Chicago gang member whose arrest in 2002 was touted by the Bush administration as the disruption of a high-level plot by Al Qaeda to set off a "dirty bomb" in the United States. He was held without charge for three years and eight months in a Navy brig, his windows blackened, his every move watched.
Then, rather than defend its actions before the Supreme Court, the White House declared a year ago that Padilla was no longer an illegal combatant, transferred him to civilian custody and filed conspiracy charges that have nothing to do with dirty bombs.
On Wednesday, a judge in Miami ruled against Padilla's defense lawyers, who argued that his abusive confinement was so traumatic that he could not assist them in a trial.
That still leaves the far bigger question of whether Padilla was tortured, as he has claimed. For there to be a trial, the judge will have to rule that Padilla was not tortured, and she made a point of saying Wednesday that her ruling on his competence was not a judgment on the torture claim.
The government's arguments at the hearing sounded ridiculous and shameful. Prosecutors said Padilla always seemed fine to his jailers, though they did things like standing on his bare feet with boots so they could shackle him. The brig psychologist testified that he had spoken to Padilla only twice, once when he was first detained, and two years later — through a slit in his cell door.
When a psychologist testified for the defense that Padilla was "an anxiety-ridden, broken individual," the prosecution said her tests were invalid — because the jailers had kept Padilla handcuffed throughout.
We will probably never know if Padilla was a would-be terrorist. So far, this trial has been a reminder of how Bush's policy on prisoners has compromised the judicial process. And it has confirmed the world's suspicions of the United States' stooping to the very behavior it once stood against.
posted by Carlos T Mock @ 8:55 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home