The announcement by President Bush that 14 “high value terrorist detainees” have been transferred from secret CIA prisons overseas to the military prison at Guantanamo Bay – perhaps to face trial before military tribunals – was puzzling, to say the least.
Until the announcement, the president had never acknowledged that the U.S. was operating secret prisons on foreign soil. Many months ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had faced some tough questions from fellow diplomats on the matter without offering much real information.
The transfers raises many questions.
Why have these prisoners been held? Under what authority was the CIA operating prisons in foreign countries? And under what rationale?
Many nations have been troubled by the existence of the CIA prisons. But President Bush has said nothing to allay fears that the CIA wouldn’t continue to hold suspects in those facilities and under what conditions. Indeed, the president said the prisons would remain open.
The president’s decision to air out the issue is a welcome one and quickly reopened a debate among allies in Europe and underscored the need to operate more openly.
Europe’s main human-rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, says that 20 countries, including Poland and Romania, helped facilitate the prisons. “Our work has helped to flush out the dirty nature of this secret war, which – we learn at last – has been carried out completely beyond any legal framework,” said Council Parliamentary Assembly president Rene van der Linden.
“The location of these prison camps must be made public,” said Germany’s Wolfgang Kreissl-Doerfler, a member of the council’s committee investigating the allegations. “We need to know if there has been any complicity in illegal acts by governments of EU countries or states seeking EU membership,” he said, according to Reuters.
The White House announcement, on the eve of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, was meant to pressure Congress to authorize the secret military tribunals. Senior Republicans John Warner of Virginia and John McCain of Arizona were rightly skeptical, and they aren’t alone.
On Thursday, the Pentagon’s top uniformed lawyers disputed White House proposals that would deny some basic trial protections to the 14 suspects, such as being present during the entire trial, keeping some evidence from the accused, and excluding statements obtained through coercion. It wasn’t the first time the administration has been challenged on the subject. The Supreme Court ruled in June that Bush’s plan violated U.S. and international law.
High value or not, suspected terrorists should be tried under a judicial process that is open, fair and in keeping with appropriate laws.
