Litigation

Editorial: Terror Trial in Federal Court Served Justice

By Peter Hardin

The life sentence given Faisal Shahzad in New York City this week represented a success for prosecuting accused terrorists in civilian courts as opposed to military tribunals, according to a New York Times editorial.

Shahzad was sentenced in federal court for trying to explode a car bomb at Times Square (see Gavel Grab). The editorial compares his receiving constitutional protections and going from terror attempt to sentencing in about five months. By contrast, the only detainee on trial at Guantanamo Bay “has been held in extralegal detention for more than eight years,” and “thin evidence against him is tainted by his credible allegations of abuse,” the editorial says. For dozens more Guantanamo detainees, the future is uncertain.

The editorial concludes by supporting federal court proceedings for accused terrorists:

“This is the choice: Justice in long-established federal courts that Americans can be proud of and the rest of the world can respect. Or illegal detentions and unending, legally dubious military tribunals. It is an easy one.”

Meanwhile an article in the Times reported that federal district Judge Lewis A. Kaplan barred prosecutors today from using a key witness in the trial of former Guantanamo detainee Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, shortly before the trial was set to begin.

Gailani faces conspiracy charges tied to bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. His lawyers had raised objections to admission of testimony by the witness, who the government found out about from Ghailani when he was held captive in a CIA-run overseas jail. In reading his order from the bench, the judge said, “The court has not reached this conclusion lightly.” He elaborated:

?It is acutely aware of the perilous nature of the world in which we live. But the Constitution is the rock upon which our nation rests. We must follow it not only when it is convenient, but when fear and danger beckon in a different direction. To do less would diminish us and undermine the foundation upon which we stand.?

Judge Kaplan’s ruling “would seem to be a setback for the Obama administration?s goal of trying former detainees in civilian courts, because it would limit the kinds of evidence that prosecutors could introduce,” the Times article said.

You can learn more about Ghailani’s case from Gavel Grab, or you can click here to read about the debate over the proper venue for trying terror detainees.

Full post as published by The Gavel on October 06, 2010 (boomark / email).