On October 17, 2006 President Bush signed Senate bill 3930 also known as the Military Commissions Act, perpetuating a domino effect of skepticism among the American people towards the Bush Administration. The act’s official purpose is to “facilitate bringing to justice terrorists and other unlawful enemy combatants through full and fair trials by military commissions, and for other purposes” according to the law. However harmonious the description, the controversial act does not cease to draw attention as people become wary of the executive powers this act implies.
The Military commissions Act was drafted subsequently to the Supreme Court’s decision on Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld. The Hamdan decision concluded that the Bush Administrations’ military commissions that were used to try
Guantanamo
Bay detainees were unconstitutional. The Military Commissions Act reforms pre-existing law to prohibit the request of the Geneva Conventions when implementing the writ of habeas corpus or other civil actions. According to the law, the president has the authority to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions in respective detainee cases. This law is applied to cases prospectively.
One point of controversy derives from the fact that torture methods will be a viable part of an interrogation process so long as it does not inflict “serious physical or mental pain.” The ironic nature of this part of the law is that many soldiers were prosecuted post World War II for waterboarding prisoners, yet now the U.S. is sufficing that such methods of torture are legitimate for interrogation purposes. Due process of law, a monumental element of our democracy explicitly defined in the 5th and 15th amendments, will be vastly mutated when applied to alien citizens that are identified as “enemy combatants” of the state. If deemed an “enemy combatant” Bush will be able to suspend one’s rights of habeas corpus (Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution) and due process of law (5th and 14th amendments) by indefinitely holding a person without a stated charge or conviction, admit hearsay as viable evidence and disallow habeas petitions.
However, the Military Commissions Act denies habeas rights only to alien citizens.
U.S. citizens detained as “enemy combatants” would be able to exercise the right of habeas corpus and challenge one’s indefinite incarceration. The Military Commissions Act is structured to work as follows: if the government chooses to bring a prosecution against the detainee, a military commission is convened for this purpose. A guilty conviction by a military commission requires a two-thirds majority of the members of the commission present at the time the vote is administered. The right to a civilian defense attorney may be restricted if the facts in the case involve classified information.
This bill remains to be a topic of controversy among vocal democrats and republicans. Time will tell if the courts advocate the Military Commissions Act to be constitutionally legitimate. But as for now, keep your citizenship and refrain from getting on Bush’s bad side because you won’t understand the beauty of habeas corpus until you’re being tried in a military tribunal or incarcerated in some ambiguous underground prison indefinitely.
