Guantanamo captives' habeas corpus petitions

The captives at the United States Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba have had over 200 writs of habeas corpus submitted on their behalf.

The Great Writ

Habeas corpus is sometimes called "The Great Writ". It is a legal instrument first guaranteed following the signing of the Magna Carta. Its literal meaning is "show the body". Its purpose is to prevent the state from holding prisoners in extrajudicial detention. When a writ of habeas corpus is filed with a court in countries which inherit elements of their judicial system from the English system of Justice the state has to show that there is a legal basis for the captive's detention -- usually that they are suspected of having broken a law.

Are Guantanamo captives eligible for the protections of habeas corpus?

Initially the Bush Administration asserted that the Guantanamo captives didn't qualify for any of the rights and protections of captives held in the USA, because the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base is not on US territory.

This executive branch assertion was challenged before the judicial branch.

Role of the Center for Constitutional Rights

The Center for Constitutional Rights took a lead role in helping to organize the activities of lawyers willing to offer their services, pro bono, to the Guantanamo captives.

Submitting writs of habeas corpus was made more difficult at first, because part of the Bush detainee policy was to keep the identity of the Guantanamo captives a secret. A writ has to be submitted by a "next friend". Some of the captives had family who would have authorized American lawyers to submit writs on their behalf, but they had no way of contacting them. Some of the captives, and their relatives are totally illiterate. Other captives' families had no idea where they were, had no idea that they were in Guantanamo.

The Supreme Court rules on Rasul v. Bush

In the summer of 2004 the United States Supreme Court ruled on the habeas corpus submission Rasul v. Bush.The Supreme Court confirmed that the aspect of the Bush Presidency's detainee policy that asserted that the captives should have no access to the protections of habeas corpus was unconstitutional.

Detainee Treatment Act of 2005

The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 prohibited US military and intelligence personnel from treating captives in ways inconsistent with Armed Forces regulations. But it also restricted Guantanamo captives from filing new writs of habeas corpus. The act did not close off the habeas corpus submission that were already in the works.

The Supreme Court rules on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

In the summer of 2006 the Supreme Court ruled that the Bush Presidency lacked the Constitutional authority to empower Guantanamo military commissions. They did rule, however, that the United States Congress did have the authority to empower trial by military commission of the Guantanamo captives.

Military Commissions Act of 2006

In addition to authorizing military commissions similar to those the Supreme Court overturned the Military Commissions Act of 2006 was intended to close off all the remaining writs of habeas corpus.

The Supreme Court and the Military Commissions Act

On June 29 2007 the Supreme Court agreed to hear outstanding habeas corpus, opening up the possibility that they might overturn some or all of the Military Commissions Act.cite news
date=Friday, June 29, 2007
publisher=The Jurist
title=Supreme Court to hear Guantanamo Bay detainee habeas cases
author=Jeannie Shawl
url=http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/06/supreme-court-to-hear-guantanamo-bay.php
accessdate=2007-06-29]

The Supreme Court rules on Boumediene v. Bush

On June 12 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled, in Boumediene v. Bush, that the Guantanamo captives were entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution.cite news
url=http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iS3b8PdQ_oVlJA2eFtDvhnnTUvFwD918J1QO0
title=High Court: Gitmo detainees have rights in court
publisher=Associated Press
author=Mark Sherman
date=June 12 2008
accessdate=2008-06-12
quote=The court said not only that the detainees have rights under the Constitution, but that the system the administration has put in place to classify them as enemy combatants and review those decisions is inadequate. [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fap.google.com%2Farticle%2FALeqM5iS3b8PdQ_oVlJA2eFtDvhnnTUvFwD918J1QO0&date=2008-06-12 mirror] ] cite news
url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080612.wgitmo0612/BNStory/International/home
title=Terror suspects can challenge detention: U.S. Supreme Court
page=
pages=
publisher=Globe and Mail
author=Mark Sherman
date=June 12 2008
accessdate=2008-06-12
quote=] cite news
url=http://www.montereyherald.com/ci_9562577?nclick_check=1
title=High Court sides with Guantanamo detainees again
publisher=Montorey Herald
author=Mark Sherman
date=June 12 2008
accessdate=2008-06-12
quote= ] cite news
url=http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/court_sides_with_gitmo_detaine.html
title=Court backs Gitmo detainees
publisher=Baltimore Sun
author=James Oliphant
date=June 12 2008
accessdate=2008-06-12
quote= [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fweblogs.baltimoresun.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fblog%2F2008%2F06%2Fcourt_sides_with_gitmo_detaine.html&date=2008-06-12 mirror] ] Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, described the CSR Tribunals as "inadequate", and wrote:

Lists of habeas petitions filed on behalf of War on Terror captives

Over two hundred captives apprehended in the USA's war on terror have had habeas petitions files on their behalf.

The proposed Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007

Senators Patrick D. Leahy and Arlen Specter have proposed Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007, to restore access to habeas corpus to the Guantanamo captives.cite news
url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/17/AR2007091701580.html
page=A18
title=Justice for Detainees: Congress can right a wrong in the war on terrorism
publisher=Washington Post
date=Tuesday, September 18 2007
accessdate=2007-09-18] Debate began on the bill on September 17 2007. It has been attached, as an amendment, to a Defense bill.

References

External links

*cite news
url=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2004/04/21/2003137534
title=Court cases pit US presidential power against detainees' rights
publisher=Taipei Times
author=Linda Greenhouse
date=Wednesday, April 21, 2004
accessdate=2008-01-25