“Ethical Qualms” and “Slipshod” Procedures Spur Yet another Guantánamo Resignation

Yesterday, Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, an Army Reserve officer, filed a declaration requesting to end his one-year duty with the Guantánamo military prosecutor’s office. Vandeveld isn’t the first prosecutor to resign from the office amid accusations of misconduct, and he may not be the last.

Read more about Vandeveld’s resignation on HRF’s Elect to End Torture ’08 blog.

HRF Testifies Before Congress: Try Terrorism Suspects in Time-Tested Federal Courts

This morning, Human Rights First CEO and Executive Director, Elisa Massimino, will be testifying before the Senate Judiciary’s Subcommittee on the Constitution in a hearing on “Restoring the Rule of Law.” The hearing is set to start at 10:15 a.m. and will be broadcast live through the committee’s website. In her testimony, Elisa will provide specific steps for ending the failed experiment at Guantanamo by closing the facility and moving legitimate terrorism cases to the federal court system. The recommendations can be found in HRF’s blueprint for the next administration, “How to Close Guantanamo.” HRF bases its recommendations on the federal system’s successful record in prosecuting more than 100 terrorism cases since September 11, a stark contrast to the military commission system at Guantanamo where only one trial has been completed in more than six years. Restoring the rule of law during the next presidential administration will require a return to our respected, tested, and constitutionally safeguarded federal court system.

Justice Department Fact Sheet Touts Success of Federal Prosecutions for Terrorist Suspects

Last Thursday, on the seventh anniversary of the September 11 attacks, the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a fact sheet stating that, “since 9/11, federal prosecutors have had considerable success in America’s federal courtrooms identifying, prosecuting, and incarcerating terrorists and would-be terrorists.”

The fact sheet emphasizes the Department’s ability to bring charges “as soon as the law, evidence, and unique circumstances of each case permit, using any charge available,” and notes the availability of a wide variety of criminal statutes to charge suspects.

The fact sheet highlights eight successful terrorism prosecutions that have been completed in recent years in the regular courts. The report also notes that federal prosecutions “have routinely produced cooperating defendants who have, in turn, provided intelligence information leading to further investigation, disruption and prosecution.”

Given the DOJ’s comments on the effectiveness of the federal courts in trying terrorism cases – which we agree with – the fact sheet’s later praise of the military commission system at Guantánamo is jarring. The DOJ trots out the current administration’s tired – and inaccurate – description of the system as providing an “unprecedented set of protections for wartime prosecutions,” but it provides no reason for its necessity and no comment on its effectiveness. And while the fact sheet cites numerous concrete examples of success in federal court prosecutions, its section on the military commission system – which since 2002 has completed only a single trial -- notes only that charges have been brought against several high-value detainees.

The DOJ acknowledges the success of the federal courts in trying terrorist suspects and handling complex issues. Given the fact that the military commission system has only successfully tried one defendant and has been severely hindered by legal and procedural uncertainties, the DOJ’s fact sheet only makes even clearer that there is no good reason for the military commissions to continue.