MARTYRDOM DEMANDED: On June 5, a U.S. military commission at Guantanamo arraigned five men suspected of organizing the 9/11 attacks against the United States. During the arraignment, two defendants asked for the death sentence: the self-proclaimed leader of the group, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Ramzi bin al-Shibh. In death they hope to become martyrs.

Mohammed also denied the legitimacy of the military court, and said he recognizes only Sharia–Islamic religious law. The government dropped charges against a sixth man originally included in the group.

Guantanamo Defendants Act as Own Lawyers

For the first time since their confinement at Guantanamo, the defendants talked with each other just before and during their arraignment.

Their defense lawyers, however, found their communication inappropriate.

Mustafa al-Hawsawi's defense attorney said his client had wanted legal representation. But then, in the courtroom, the other defendants verbally pressured him and he changed his mind. Al-Hawsawi, visibly shaking, said he would represent himself.

Eventually the judge, Marine Col. Ralph Kohlmann, allowed three of the five defendants to act as their own lawyers. He made no decision regarding Mustafa al-Hawsawi or Ramzi bin al-Shibh, who claims to be taking a psychotropic drug.

Do 9/11 Detainees Deserve Due Process?

Normal due process in an American court of civilian law includes the right to...

• remain silent
• be present during the hearing of evidence
• cross-examine witnesses who testified against you
• be represented by a lawyer

Critics of the 9/11 military commission process say:

• Because some of the evidence is classified it won't be heard in open court. (Impartial observers hear censored audio from the courtroom.)
• Classified evidence cannot be shared with the defendants.
• Evidence obtained through coercion (such as torture) should not be allowed in court.

The American Civil Liberties Union was quick to condemn the proceedings. In a press release, Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU said, "No matter who is representing these defendants, many of whom have been abused and tortured, there needs to be a process in place that adheres to the values of due process and the rule of law that are the foundations of American justice—and this isn't it. Without constitutional guarantees in place, any verdict rendered by these proceedings will be regarded as illegitimate by the American people and in the eyes of the world." (ACLU, 6/05/08)

Proponents of the 9/11 military commission process say:

• The defendants have no right to represent themselves.
• Due process in a military court has a different meaning than in a civilian criminal court.

National Review Editor Andrew C. McCarthy said, "Alien enemy combatants detained by the military outside the United States are not entitled to American constitutional rights." (National Review, 6/06/08). If the defendants insist on representing themselves, McCarthy said, then they don't get access to classified information.

Copyright © 2008 Informify

Question for Readers:

Do you think these military commission proceedings are legal?