ILNews

IU McKinney students observe trial proceedings at Guantanamo Bay

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

gitmo-cole-15col.jpg The USS Cole after it was attacked by suicide bombers in October 2000 in Yemen. (Photo courtesy of United States Marine Corps)

Sitting in a hotel room, preparing to watch a video cast of a hearing with Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, one of the alleged masterminds behind the bombing of the USS Cole, Whitney Coffin considered the process of using military commissions to try suspected terrorists.

“Before I actually see the hearing, my pre-impression is this is the best way to do it,” Coffin, a 2014 graduate of Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, said. “Some push to put this in federal courts, but what state is going to want an accused terrorist in their state? It’s a military commission. I think it’s necessary to have (the commissions) in Cuba where it has always been in Guantanamo Bay.”
 

 

riley-patricia1.jpg Riley

Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Patricia Riley holds a very different opinion. After she returned from a week in Guantanamo where she observed other hearings for al-Nashiri, she struggled to describe what she witnessed.

“When people hear that I’ve been there, they ask, ‘What’s it like? What happened?’” Riley said. “All I’ve been able to say is, ‘it’s disturbing.’”

The differing views reflect the questions, confusion and anger surrounding the court proceedings at Guantanamo Bay. The United States is navigating new territory judicially as well as emotionally as it attempts to figure out how to try these detainees. They are individuals who do not fit the traditional definitions of soldiers, and they are accused of committing acts of terrorism that do not adhere to the rules of conventional warfare.

As Coffin pointed out, “Guantanamo Bay is such a gray area.”

Shining a light into the grayness is the U.S. Military Commission Observation Project at IU McKinney School of Law. Students, faculty, staff and alumni are joining organizations to watch the hearings and blog about their thoughts and impressions.


edwards-george.jpg Edwards

The continuing project is part of the law school’s Program in International Human Rights Law founded by IU McKinney Professor George Edwards. In February the program was awarded nongovernmental organization observer status by the Pentagon’s Convening Authority for Guantanamo Bay U.S. Military Commissions. Other groups that have observer status include the American Bar Association, the American Civil Liberties Union and Amnesty International.

“I did it for the school. I did it for the students. I did it for the promotion and protection of human rights, generally,” Edwards said of his decision to have the program apply for observer status.

Letting the world know

In particular, Edwards said, the observation program fit well with PIHRL’s teaching, research and service responsibilities in the area of international human rights law. A key component of the IU McKinney observation project is that the participants will share their experiences with the ongoing military commission with others.

Recent blog entries from the IU McKinney participants provide colorful details about every part of the process – from what they packed and how they traveled to the observation site, to descriptions of courtrooms and summaries of the arguments presented by the prosecutors and defense attorneys.

Third-year IU McKinney student Kristi McMains wrote about her surprise that the defendant, al-Nashiri, looked like any man walking down the street. He was clean-shaven with a head of dark hair, and during the proceeding he was “leaning back in his chair, yawning and looking sort of nonchalant about what was happening around him.”

Participants in the Military Commission Observation Project are sent either to Fort Meade in Maryland where they watch a video feed of the hearing being conducted at Guantanamo Bay or to Guantanamo Bay itself to witness the proceedings in person.

The IU McKinney students who apply to observe typically have an interest in national security law and counterterrorism. In their blog entries and conversations, they are generally supportive of the military commission system, maintaining the defendants are getting a fair trial.

Students and graduates prepare for the observations by studying the military commission process. Prior to spending a week in Guantanamo Bay, Riley read extensively about the detention center and the detainees. She also talked to Indiana attorney Richard Kammen, who is the lead defense counsel for al-Nashiri.

“I wanted to be a witness,” Riley said of her reason for participating. “I really think that we’re going to be on the wrong side of history on this issue so I wanted to watch it for myself and try to understand legally how this could be happening.”

Open, clear and informed mind

The observation project is not the first time IU McKinney has been involved with the military commissions. Under Edwards’ direction, PIHRL did legal work in 2003 and 2004 on behalf of the defense of 800 detainees then being held at Guantanamo Bay. Again in 2007 and 2008, the program provided some assistance for Omar Khadr, a Canadian detainee.

In addition, Edwards was selected as an expert witness for the trial of David Hicks, the Australian detainee who was the first person convicted in a U.S. military commission since World War II.

Edwards said the work done for the defense is not reflective of any bias on the part of his program. The defense counsel simply called first, he said, and if the prosecution had reached out, the program might have done work for that side.

The neutrality extends to the observation project. Edwards said he seeks to attend, observe, analyze, critique and report.

“I’m interested in helping to ensure the right to a fair trial is provided for all stakeholders,” he said. “The stakeholders are more than just the defendants. The stakeholders’ interest includes the prosecutors who represent society and victims. I’m interested in the right for all stakeholders to have a full and fair proceeding.”

The observers, Edwards said, can bring the global community into Guantanamo by going to the hearings with an open mind, a clear mind and an informed mind.

Observing the hearings is demanding work done under tight security that is unusual and unfamiliar for many individuals who participate.

At Guantanamo Bay, the observers were escorted from their tents to a pre-fabricated building where the courtroom is located, Riley said. They walked through a security screening, much like those at airports, at the end of which a young soldier stood behind a podium and wrote each observer’s name in an old-fashioned ledger book.

Inside, the observers were assigned seats in the courtroom gallery which is separated from the judge and attorneys by two panes of glass. They could see what was happening through the glass, but the audio comes from the large monitors which show a video of the proceedings with a 40-second delay.

At Fort Meade, the observers see the same video feed. It is shown in a large movie theater but, as in Guantanamo, the participants are not allowed to bring anything other than pen and paper into the room.

Jeffrey Kerner, a 2002 graduate of IU McKinney, described his experience at Fort Meade as sitting in the 100-year-old theater next to a 75-year-old usher. Recounting the experience, he, too, raised questions about public access, wondering why the proceedings are not streamed over the Internet allowing him to watch the hearings on his computer from home.

The trial of al-Nashiri has yet to start. Hearings being conducted now are going over the various motions filed by the defense and the prosecution.

And that caused additional concern for Kerner, who worried about the pace of the proceedings. He said bright people are on both sides, but the process is getting bogged down in multiple motions and hearings. He sees danger that the process could continue without end.•

Read more about other  Hoosiers' involvement with the proceedings at Guantanamo Bay, including the Indiana lawyer representing Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • guantanamera
    Yo soy un hombre sincero De donde crece la palma, Y antes de morirme quiero Echar mis versos del alma.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  2. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

  3. Low energy. Next!

  4. Had William Pryor made such provocative statements as a candidate for the Indiana bar he could have been blackballed as I have documented elsewhere on this ezine. That would have solved this huuuge problem for the Left and abortion industry the good old boy (and even girl) Indiana way. Note that Diane Sykes could have made a huuge difference, but she chose to look away like most all jurists who should certainly recognize a blatantly unconstitutional system when filed on their docket. See footnotes 1 & 2 here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html Sykes and Kanne could have applied a well established exception to Rooker Feldman, but instead seemingly decided that was not available to conservative whistleblowers, it would seem. Just a loss and two nice footnotes to numb the pain. A few short years later Sykes ruled the very opposite on the RF question, just as she had ruled the very opposite on RF a few short years before. Indy and the abortion industry wanted me on the ground ... they got it. Thank God Alabama is not so corrupted! MAGA!!!

  5. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/ogden-quitting-law-citing-high-disciplinary-fine/PARAMS/article/35323 THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

ADVERTISEMENT