rssKhadr’s Day in Court: August 10
Monday, May 17, 2010 at 1:18 pm
- 2 Comments
So now that the pre-trial hearing in Omar Khadr’s military commission has recessed while the government conducts a mental-health exam of the 23-year old detainee, when will Khadr’s proceedings actually resume? July and August, just in time for the most oppressively baking temperatures that Guantanamo Bay has to offer!
According to the judge in the case, Army Col. Patrick Parrish, the final phase of the pre-trial “suppression” hearing — to determine whether Khadr’s statements to interrogators are sufficiently voluntary for the government to use against him — will begin on July 12. That’s when the government’s assessment of Khadr’s mental state as a 15 and 16-year old detainee in American custody, raised by the defense, will square off against Khadr’s attorneys’ experts, who will contend that a teenager under military interrogation is inherently under duress. It emerged during the first phase of the hearing that Khadr’s first interrogator told him a “fictional story” about a young detainee raped and killed for not cooperating with his captors.
The actual trial phase of the military commission, in which the government will seek to prove that Khadr threw a grenade in 2002 that killed U.S. Army Special Forces Sgt. First Class Christopher Speer, will commence on August 10. That’s the first military commission of the Obama era. And it may not even happen: both the government and Khadr’s attorneys have publicly acknowledged seeking a plea deal to settle the government’s case against Khadr. But if they can’t reach one, it’s back to Guantanamo on August 10 for a hot and tense trial.
Follow Spencer Ackerman on Twitter
2 Comments
Comment posted May 17, 2010 @ 6:09 pm
Well before this trial (?) began, it must be assumed that Obama must have been briefed on obvious contentious issues – ignoring the child soldier treaty to which the US is a signatory, the view that the military tribunal is a kangaroo court, the obvious coercion in obtaining statements, etc, etc.
In light of these issues, I am at a loss to understand why Obama chose this case to proceed.
Comment posted May 19, 2010 @ 1:53 pm
I've been wondering about that too. Perhaps the Obama Admin thought dropping the charges or shifting to civilian court would result in objections after it's been going on so long.
There are indications they hoped Canada would finally seek repatriation which would perhaps get them off the hook. But despite repatriation orders from lower courts and the Supreme Court's declaration that Canada was participating in a violation of Khadr's rights by the US government, the minority Conservative government remains adamant. A majority of members of Parliament supported adoption of a Committee recommendation for repatrition with no Conservative support. Numerous national and internatonal legal and human rights groups have raised objections to the case.
There's also the contentious nature of the war crimes charges based on the laws of war, even aside from his age. See article by Lt. Col. David Frakt on the Manual released just in time for the Khadr trial, seeming to suggest that a violation of the laws of war isn't necessary to convict somebody or violating them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-frakt/new-m…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
