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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  2. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  3. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  4. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

  5. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

ADVERTISEMENT