Quote:
Originally Posted by JAGO
Some quick thoughts:
I offer the observation that members of AQ are not members of a nation's military but rather stateless w/ respect to Army in the conduct of their actions. I would have preferred they be classified as "illegal combatants" (as distinguished from a Levy en masse) and then as illegal combatants they can be charged with their misdeeds under the law of war. Pursuant to our treaty obligations and the law of war, the US military has jurisdiction and them and the procedures set out in Title 10 US Code suppl by the military commissions act, allow for the military to have jurisdiction over those acts committed in violation of the law of war.
"Legal combatants" (military fighting in uniform and obeying the law of war) and those who rise up are not tried, but rather held as PW (in some cases the status is retained personnel and others civilian internes) until hostilities cease. Remember those WWII moves and Hogans Heroes? Held for the duration but not punished for crimes.
When this administration decided to handle the "illegal combatants" as criminals, in order to try and hopefully punish, we come down to two issues - jurisdiction and venue. Under Title 18 US Code, does the US have jurisdiction, that is the power to try the offense? The fact that over 3,000 persons were unlawfully killed with malice aforthought and certain persons conspired to commit murder, the U.S. obviously has the jurisdiction to adjudge the case. Nations have the power to defend their nationals. Likewise, the acts took place within the geographic confines of the nation. As far as the venue (the appropriate location to try the case), crimes against the US may generally be tried in any District in which acts associated with that crime took place. The fact that several thousand persons died in the S Dist of New York would justify that as one of the possible venues. Others might be where the flight training took place, where the aircraft were hijacked, etc.
|
Thank you for this - I was hoping someone with more legal experience (which doesn't take much) especially in the realm of military courts would chime in. I know there are a number of JAG on the boards.
What I'm continually confused at and have looked long and hard to find is exactly WHAT they are classified as right now. I see various incarnations of what their classification is at any given moment. Does it matter in the long run and they attach a different classification at will? Because in my mind, this is the crux of the jurisdiction issue and what could screw jurisdiction up completely. I know if I were defense, I'd be screaming illegal seizure at the top of my lungs.
Also, am I mistaken in thinking that they've already been held before a military tribunal to some degree? How would that affect jeopardy?