If at First You Don’t Convict, Try, Try Again
A federal appeals court is looking into the legitimacy of “do-overs” for detainee tribunals at Guantanamo Bay. Critics say the practice is unfair because it effectively allows the government to retry cases until it gets the results it wants, but there may not be much the high court can do under current legislation.
WAIT, BEFORE YOU GO…
New York Times:
The military system of determining whether detainees are properly held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, includes an unusual practice: If Pentagon officials disagree with the result of a hearing, they order a second one, or even a third, until they approve of the finding.
These “do-overs,” as some critics call them, are among the most controversial parts of the military’s system of determining whether detainees are enemy combatants, and the fairness of the repeat hearings is at the center of a pivotal federal appeals court case.
On Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit begins consideration of the first of what are expected to be scores of challenges to the military panels’ decisions that detainees are enemy combatants and are properly held.
If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.
Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.