Terrorist suspects get more rights in US trials

US: Easing some of the concerns of civil rights advocates, the US Secretary of Defence, Mr Donald Rumsfeld, yesterday announced…

US: Easing some of the concerns of civil rights advocates, the US Secretary of Defence, Mr Donald Rumsfeld, yesterday announced new rules under which military tribunals will try suspected terrorists.

Pointing out that both civil and military courts systems in the US might be different but both produced just results, Mr Rumsfeld insisted that the tribunals will also, although different, be just.

Meanwhile the US military said it had killed at least 10 Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters who attacked coalition forces in eastern Afghanistan. And a US commander in Afghanistan also told journalists on Wednesday that they might cross the border into Pakistan to capture or kill al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters widely believed to have found sanctuary there.

The tribunals, also known as commissions, will operate much like courts martial although they will allow greater prosecutorial discretion in presenting hearsay evidence and have fewer requirements for what is called the chain of evidence, the requirement to chronicle every stage evidence goes through from source to court.

READ SOME MORE

Mr Rumsfeld said such requirements are difficult to comply with in battlefield conditions and the new rules set a standard requiring prosecutors only to show evidence has "probative value to a reasonable person".

Although still sceptical about the tribunals civil rights groups have welcomed two elements of the reform of the tribunals as originally envisaged, the requirement for unanimity if a death penalty is to be imposed while a two-thirds vote of the three-to-seven member military panel is sufficient for a conviction, and the decision to allow an appeal procedure, albeit only to a military court. The president or Defence Secretary would have a final say on a death penalty.

The American Civil Liberties Union argues, however, the prisoners could be denied due process rights. "If, in fact, they will allow no appeal to a civilian body independent of the executive branch - putting the lives of defendants solely in the hands of the President - then they will not respect basic American and international ideals of fairness and justice," said Mr Timothy Edgarof the ACLU.

Patrick Smyth

Patrick Smyth

Patrick Smyth is former Europe editor of The Irish Times