[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Guest Commentary December 14, 2001
The Case for Tribunals
The Honorable Jon Kyl
Maybe some of us have forgotten we are at war.
That is perhaps the most charitable explanation for the breathless and over-the-top criticism from some members of Congress on President Bush's order to allow military tribunals, in certain circumstances, for foreigners accused of committing war crimes against the United States.
Free Newsletter
Get the scoop on important legislation, Congressional action, election updates, hard-hitting political commentary, the latest developments in the War on Terror...and more! Just enter your email address below.
Privacy: Your name and email address will be confidential - never rented, never sold.
The carping reached its crescendo when the Senate Judiciary Committee called Attorney General Ashcroft and other Justice Department officials away from their law-enforcement duties to defend an order they did not issue and over which they have no direct oversight responsibility. To my astonishment, Democrats on the committee spent more time questioning the witnesses on legal protections for terrorists than they did addressing how we can better protect American citizens.
I strongly support President Bush's order as measured, appropriate, and necessary at a time of war. It does not apply to any American citizen. It does not deprive foreigners accused of war crimes of access to counsel or evidence. It does not pose constitutional problems; the U.S. Supreme Court has twice ruled that such tribunals are legitimate exercises of presidential power. The order is not novel; war tribunals were used by other commanders-in-chief, most recently President Franklin Roosevelt during World War II. It does not apply indiscriminately; the order refers to war crimes committed against the people of the United States.
The order is issued by a President who has shown himself to be resolute and responsible; at the very least, his actions deserve the benefit of the doubt.
The President's order appropriately allows our government to prosecute war criminals without exposing sensitive intelligence information to the media or other terrorist groups. It also would protect judges and potential jurors from threats, intimidation and violence by al-Qaeda agents.
We are at war with an enemy who thinks nothing of abusing individual liberties. These people in fact use our liberties against us.
As the Attorney General pointed out, al-Qaeda terrorists have even assembled a manual that instructs their operatives to use our judicial processes to mislead investigators and lie about who they and their associates are. They are trained to use our free press to pose as victims of misconduct by U.S. authorities and spread their messages through code phrases to other al-Qaeda operatives. They are told to invent stories of torture and abuse in prison to gain sympathy for their cause.
Have no doubt that public trials of these terrorists would lead to circuses of manipulation, falsehood, and deliberate signals to other terrorists still roaming free in the United States and who still seek to do us harm.
It is certainly appropriate for the Senate to ask questions of administration officials, but there's a difference between obtaining information and using the hearing to bash the Attorney General.
Bear in mind that these military tribunals would treat terrorists in a fashion similar to U.S. soldiers accused of crimes. As my colleague, Senator Zell Miller, a Democrat from Georgia, recently asked, "Why in the world would we try our own soldiers with this system of justice but not some foreigner who is trying to kill us?" Exactly.
Jon Kyl is a U.S. Senator (R-Arizona) and writes a weekly column; the above has been adapted from his December 14, 2001 column. To contact him, Click Here.
The above column has been distributed by PoliticsOL.com.
