May 15, 2009 7:26am

Human Rights Activists Assail President Obama’s Decision on Military Commissions

Human rights activists expressed disappointment with President Obama’s decision to restore revamped military commission trials for detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

"Everyone knows the military commissions have been a dismal failure," Gabor Rona, the international legal director of Human Rights First, tells the Los Angeles Times in what will no doubt be a harbinger of human rights groups reaction today. "The results of the cases will be suspect around the world. It is a tragic mistake to continue them."

"It’s disappointing that Obama is seeking to revive rather than end this failed experiment," ACLU attorney Jonathan Hafetz told the London Guardian. "There’s no detainee at Guantanamo who cannot be tried and shouldn’t be tried in the regular federal courts system."

Human rights groups point out that in August 2008, then-Sen. Obama seemed to indicate he was leaning towards trying detainees in U.S. courts and through the court martial system. Responding to the Hamdan verdict, Mr. Obama’s campaign issued a statement saying:

"I commend the military officers who presided over this trial and served on the hearing panel under difficult and unprecedented circumstances. They and all our Armed Forces continue to serve this country with valor in the fight against terrorism. That the Hamdan trial — the first military commission trial with a guilty verdict since 9/11 — took several years of legal challenges to secure a conviction for material support for terrorism underscores the dangerous flaws in the Administration’s legal framework. It’s time to better protect the American people and our values by bringing swift and sure justice to terrorists through our courts and our Uniform Code of Military Justice. And while it is important to convict anyone who provides material support for terrorism, it is long past time to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and the terrorists who murdered nearly 3000 Americans." (Emphasis added).

A White House official says that the president has "always envisioned a role for commissions, properly constituted," and that the August statement was not meant to preclude them.

The official points to President Obama’s 2006 vote in favor of the commissions as proposed by GOP Sens. John Warner or Virginia, John McCain of Arizona, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, his statements during that debate, as well as work since November with Sen. Graham on re-creating the commissions in a way more likely to pass Supreme Court constitutional muster.

The reference then-Sen. Obama made to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (courts martial) last August, the official recalls, "was around the time of the debate with Sen. McCain that terrorism is not just a law enforcement matter but also a matter that is a question of the laws and rules of war."

– jpt

User Comments

Assail in May.. then go away..
Human Rights Peeps are like typical do-gooders.. ‘.they never finish the job.’

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 15, 2009, 8:35 am 8:35 am

Do you feel betrayed??? Do you feel like Obama lied to you??? Do you feel like Obama is just doing the same things Bush did??? You should because that is exactly what he is doing. I hope you really did not believe him when he made all of those promises to you, surley not.

Posted by: billy bob | May 15, 2009, 8:37 am 8:37 am

I did not vote for President Obama but I must say that on issues of national security he has pleasantly surprised me.

Posted by: hkdakota | May 15, 2009, 8:46 am 8:46 am

I would propose that these activists and ACLU members be required to serve 2 years in the military. Maybe they would have a better concept of the people they are defending.

Posted by: PWC032096 | May 15, 2009, 8:53 am 8:53 am

Wasn’t Bush considered “Satan” for doing what Obama is now going to continue doing? What does that make our new President? The depths of hypocrisy we are seeing these days is beyond compare. Years and years of trashing and screaming, only to do continue with the status quo.

Posted by: jerry | May 15, 2009, 9:07 am 9:07 am

Bringing the terrorists to the US and then holding them indefinitely without rights is going to prove to be one the most stupid things Obama will ever do.

Posted by: drjohn | May 15, 2009, 9:16 am 9:16 am

If there was one protester against Bush he (often she) got ALL kinds of coverage. How much anti-Obama coverage do you see?
Chrissie Matthews say that the press should not be tough on Obama.

Posted by: drjohn | May 15, 2009, 9:17 am 9:17 am

Isn’t condemnation from human rights and even worst, agree and continuing the policies of George W. Bush even most prodoganda for al-Qeada then some pictures?
Plus, how thick is the White House to ignore that nearly every major announcement they want to the public to focus on, detainee torture still continues to dominate the new cycle through the early months of this administration. Yet they just refused to get ahead of this story and think some town hall in Nowheresville will cover it up?

Posted by: Jordan | May 15, 2009, 9:18 am 9:18 am

This is a surprise to the LIBS? Got that fish hook out of your cheek yet? Maybe when you stop chanting “BUSH LIED..CHENEY LIED!!!” you will be able to hear your Prez lying??? So far he has been held unaccountable by the media and by the other hardcore Kool-Aid drinkers…but those days may be over soon and you will discover the awful truth that THERE IS NO REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS…it is a mind game to keep us all divided into camps fighting each other while they steal our country away from us.

Posted by: porchhound | May 15, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am

Those held under the protections of the Geneva Convention are subject to military tribunals and affording them a civil trial is a violation of the Geneva Convention.

Posted by: drjohn | May 15, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am

The ghost of Rumsfield lives on.

Posted by: Heavenislikethis | May 15, 2009, 9:27 am 9:27 am

As a McCain and Bush supporter, it is a pleasant surprise to see that Obama has at least a clue in this area and the wisdom to accept well proven policies, even though he campaigned against them. Too bad the idiot liberals don’t get it.

Posted by: Suc Mi Wang | May 15, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am

Dear activists:
Remember, you only had the choice of:
The lesser of two evils.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 15, 2009, 9:36 am 9:36 am

so activists..
Don’t beat yourself up over this..
(wait a minute.. you don’t allow beating)..

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 15, 2009, 9:38 am 9:38 am

Obama has been pretty consistent that he’d use military commissions, BUT ones that were actually constitutionally configured – which, if you recall, the Supreme Court ruled Bush’s kangaroo courts were not.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 15, 2009, 9:43 am 9:43 am

Obama will soon announce that the “military tribunals” are called something else. Obama doesn’t have a clue.He said he was ending the war in Iraq and bringing the soldiers home. Instead he is sending them to Afghanistan.

Posted by: CW | May 15, 2009, 9:43 am 9:43 am

>>The ghost of Rumsfield lives on.<<
It's "Rumsfeld," expert.

Posted by: W. Axl Rose | May 15, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am

Did Anyone Really Believe Obama Was Differant?? Hope Not!

Posted by: as if | May 15, 2009, 9:45 am 9:45 am

“Remember, you only had the choice of:
The lesser of two evils.”
The last truly kind, honest man to be in the White House was Jimmy Carter, and we saw how well he fared in Washington. Saints don’t survive long in the American political climate.

Posted by: Skip | May 15, 2009, 9:47 am 9:47 am

Military tribunals “properly constituted” is the key here. The original Bush proposal, which then Sen. Obama opposed, was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Obama has supported other versions proposed by the Congress which would pass muster by the SC.

Posted by: EdDoc80 | May 15, 2009, 9:49 am 9:49 am

But he was a Constitutional scholar, so he frankly has NO excuse for knwoingly and willfully choosing to at best ignore, and at worst avoid the rule of law in this matter and so many others. The faces may change but the policies NEVER seem to, do they? I thought in order for their to be an election, there had to be a choice between to OPPOSING forces. Looks like either way we still get the same ol’ crap! Shocking, isn’t it!?!

Posted by: hmn | May 15, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am

Military tribunals “properly constituted” is the key here. The original Bush proposal, which then Sen. Obama opposed, was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Obama has supported other versions proposed by the Congress which would pass muster by the SC.
Posted by: EdDoc80 | May 15, 2009 9:49:40 AM
Get a life, what does that mean??? “Other Versions”

Posted by: billy bob | May 15, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am

“Everyone knows the military commissions have been a dismal failure,” Gabor Rona
- under Bush/Cheney/Rumensfeld/Rove and their supporters it was. Didn’t Bush and Cheney Bully the Military?
- Now under Obama the Military has a chance to get it right? Don’t blow it! You get one chance and if you fail again we are all in trouble!!!!

Posted by: Chuck | May 15, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am

A simple comment from Obama such as, “I was naive in my prior opinions regarding terrorists and our treatment of them…” might be helpful. Perhaps the world really is something scary. I at least think Obama is fearful at what could happen.

Posted by: genhrules | May 15, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am

Skip
Like Alice Cooper said.. no more mr. niceguy..

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 15, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am

In one way.. I sympathize with the POTUS getting stuck with a bunch of bad stuff and leftovers..
.. in another way.. I believe the Democrats may have been saying.. just leave your mess.. we’re going to clean it up.. sort of like, a longer than usual lame duck period of time.. an acceptance of power loss on the part of the GOP.. maybe premature, maybe just realistic ..

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 15, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am

Better late than never-where were they while all the abuses were going on? A Military Tribunal that is convened with a multitude of juges that are veterans of war and civilian conflict actually makes more sense in terrorist cases before a civilian judge and jury-These men area accused of warcrimes not civilian crimes! The only real problem that may occur is that Military tribunals are difficult to turn into media circuses and reality shows!

Posted by: Dave of Detroit | May 15, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am

The Far left Cant Handle Him, The Far right Cant Handle him, hes in the Middle thats Good thats what a Good President Does. thank you President Obama for taking us down the middle road and not to the Extreme Left like Bush went to the Extreme Right!

Posted by: Angie in Pa | May 15, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

billy bob:”Get a life, what does that mean??? “Other Versions”"
A raft of different rules on evidence, counsel selection, and procedures. Your clear lack of knowledge in the area does not infer ignorance on the part of anyone else.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 15, 2009, 10:16 am 10:16 am

hmn:”But he was a Constitutional scholar, so he frankly has NO excuse for knwoingly and willfully choosing to at best ignore, and at worst avoid the rule of law in this matter and so many others.”
Military tribunals can be constitutional configured to fit quite well within the rule of law. Has his proposal failed any legal test?

Posted by: jhw539 | May 15, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am

CW:”He said he was ending the war in Iraq and bringing the soldiers home. Instead he is sending them to Afghanistan. ”
From day one he has been advocating an increase in the soldiers in Afghanistan. It was a major theme that Iraq was a wasteful distraction from the real war against the real perpetrator of 9/11.
It is telling that you have to lie and rewrite such well documented fact to support your opinion.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 15, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am

Maybe Obama is starting to see the world can be a dangerous place where people will take advantage of you and kill you if given the chance, and not the world where you give hand outs to and forgive and forget the people who killed your loved ones. Sure the world is not all gloomy and dangerous, quite the opposite, but if you let your guard down, there are those who will take advantage.

Posted by: John Boom | May 15, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am

Seems most of you have short memories. The ACLU and others need to review history. In WWII, military tribunals were the ‘only’ judicial system that punished the Japanese soldiers that committed terrible crimes against US and Allied soldiers who were prisoners of war. People like the ACLU seem to say it OK for other countries to torture and maim our soldiers, but want to send our people to jail, if they are harsh to enemy combatants. Get real.

Posted by: Rocketjl | May 15, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

Human Rights groups? Let’s park the terrorists next their office so they get a dose of reality and have their brains adjusted ( or removed as has been done in many cases). They can also have a demonstration of what real torture is first hand.

Posted by: brian | May 15, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

Oh the humanity! You’ve been betrayed by the messiah! I knew he could not keep many of the promises he made on the campaign trail that over 66 million idiots actually believed. It’s called LYING! This is what happens when you vote a rookie in as president. He’s finally seeing things the “right” way. This won’t be the last decision he makes that you will feel betrayed on so keep your box of kleenex close by you. Ha, ha!!

Posted by: John | May 15, 2009, 10:49 am 10:49 am

“… the real perpetrator of 9/11″
Which was–Afghanistan? How many Afghans were among the nineteen?
Or was it Pakistan, where Obama is now killing civilians with Predator assassination strikes?

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | May 15, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am

What they call now the ‘hard left” is what he was courting back in the primaries, saying everything they wanted to hear to help him slain that ‘terrible monster/racist/liar’ Clinton.
Jon Stewart had him last night in video back then lying to our faces on every issue he has reversed now. A politician lying to get elected. What a novel concept.

Posted by: Zing | May 15, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am

* In a March 19 speech, Obama said: “Let me be clear: Ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved—just as there would be dangers involved with staying indefinitely. We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met, and to make sure that our troops are secure.”
* During a March 2 Washington Post foreign policy “Q&A,” when asked what size his proposed “over-the-horizon” force in Iraq would be, Obama responded: “The precise size of the residual force will depend on consultations with our military commanders and will depend on the circumstances on the ground, including the willingness of the Iraqi government to move toward political accommodation.”
* During an interview on the February 5 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, when asked, “[I]s there anything that would change your position about pulling out troops … if he [Gen. David Petraeus] convinces you that we’re on the right track?” Obama began his response by saying, “Well, what I’ve been very clear about is that I will always listen to commanders on the ground.”

Posted by: O | May 15, 2009, 11:51 am 11:51 am

“Human Rights Groups” ? How about “Radical Leftist groups”.

Posted by: Ron | May 15, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am

Obama is now killing civilians with Predator assassination strikes?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena
if Obama starts a needless war like Bush & Cheney, you’ll have something to rag about,
I notive you didn’t mention the Iraqi ‘body count’ of civilians…….

Posted by: H2O | May 15, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am

jhw, how do you feel about the ACLU using your money to oppose the president on this issue?

Posted by: mad | May 15, 2009, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm

let us not forget
WE AT WAR
with an enemy that is crazy
no common sense, just hate!
please challenge newscasterS to mention every day,
JEHAD LOVES KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN
we are next any day now!!!
warning from an 82 year old veteran

Posted by: richard malisher | May 15, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm

Geez, didn’t the media call these military tribunals when Bush was in charge? Why don’t we just start calling them tupperware parties now that Obama’s in charge. Hey media, your bias is showing!

Posted by: Daniel | May 15, 2009, 1:00 pm 1:00 pm

Is it true that we actually beheaded some people, oh wait that was the terorists.

Posted by: DB | May 15, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm

I did not vote for President Obama but I must say that on issues of national security he has pleasantly surprised me.
Posted by: hkdakota | May 15, 2009 8:46:14 AM
—————————————-
dkdakota, I hate to admit it, but I agree with. At least on this issue I have to give POTUS props for doing the right thing.

Posted by: dragoon70056 | May 15, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm

thank you President Obama for taking us down the middle road and not to the Extreme Left like Bush went to the Extreme Right!
~~~
Yeah that’s right. So what if President Obama is doing the same things President Bush did. When the latter did them it was “far right” but when the former does them it is “in the middle”.
Great job Angie!

Posted by: Plumber | May 15, 2009, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm

LEt these cry babies pay for these scum bags food and boarding then they will change their tune real quick

Posted by: mark | May 15, 2009, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm

This was entirely predictable. There are and were no other options. Obama was either flat out lying all along, or he was once again, too inexperienced and plainly stupid to understand that this was always the best solution to a difficult, modern problem.
In the past these folks may have simply been killed on the battlefield..
NOW Obama will posture and pretend that what he is doing is somehow different. That is what I believe is called a distinction without a difference.
He has a history of being abjectly stupid AND a liar.
Even today he makes speeches, like at his town hall yesterday where he proclaimed that we cannot continue this unsustainable debt.
HE CREATED 75% OF THE PROBLEM in just a few short months.
Even the democrats now call the porkulus bill the “EARMARK BILL” and they laugh and think it is funny that they put one over on all of us.
Obama is a self serving, power grabbing, CORRUPT, liar who needs to be in jail for all he has done to divert US assets into the pockets of his union and other supporters.

Posted by: MNM | May 15, 2009, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm

Cindy Shehan? where are you? We miss you? Obama needs you to camp out in front of his home to protest.

Posted by: Jim Rod | May 15, 2009, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm

The problem with trying these cases in Federal Courts is that most of them would be thrown out due to lack of due process during the detainees’ period of detention. A military tribunal could at least make some of the charges stick. Perhaps the President was not aware of how badly these cases had been mismanaged!

Posted by: Mary | May 15, 2009, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm

Where are the human rights activists when women under Sharia Law are beaten, stoned, lashed, honor killed (real torture)? These groups have no credibility. I don’t know why they are given so much press/power. Oh, that’s right. They are anti-American.

Posted by: pam | May 15, 2009, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm

Pam, I don’t expect much from this administration in regard to woman. Chief of Staff, David Axelrod, referred to Miss California as a dog. Granted, it was in a joke, but can you image the uproar had Bush’s chief of staff made the same remark.
The president frequently invokes his daughters as a reason that something should or shouldn’t be done.
Don’t expect him to rebuke Axelrod.

Posted by: mad | May 15, 2009, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm

Again, Obama now changes his mind because he sees that due to the fact of how these cases were handled before he got in office, in federal court alot of the worse ones would be released on technicalities. Some we know would instantly rejoin Al-Qaeda and commence with killing american troops.
This has happened before folks.
These are not easy issues which do not conform to idealogy. If we do what the far left wants and stick them in the federal court system, some of them are getting released. There’s just no way around it. But we can’t go back to how Bush did it either which was to bury them under the jail, forget about em until the war on terror is over. Whenever THAT will be…
Obama had to find a way where they have due process so their individual cases get looked at, finally let the ones go who shouldn’t be there, but keep imprisoned the ones who we know will instantly be re-recruited by terrorist groups.
Far right likes to say that because Bush is out of office, why the far left keeps talking about him. Bush may be gone but Obama and the country will have to come to terms with some of his worst policy decisions for months and possibly years to come. Some of them not so easily reversed.
This is why elections matter. So many americans either weren’t paying attention during the Bush years or outright didn’t vote at all in those close elections. Those who are so enraged about torture now, how many of you spoke out about Gitmo, or treatment of terror suspects, or even voted in 2005 or 2000 even?
It’s also true what they say that people usually get the gov’t they deserve. At least people, especially younger voters are paying attention after the Obama candidacy and election.

Posted by: Joe G. | May 16, 2009, 6:27 am 6:27 am

Also many of the reasons some of these detainees can’t just be thrown on the federal docket is because of how long they’ve been there and technically they only SAY death to america but haven’t actually DONE anything to advance that cause YET. But we suspect they will.
I just say like any other flips this administration has had to make because of the flawed ways the situation was handled in the previous administration, we’ll have to wait and see how this plays out.
The devil is in the details.

Posted by: Joe G. | May 16, 2009, 9:16 am 9:16 am

mad:
re: ‘referred to Miss California as a dog. ‘
it’s worse than that,
-Obama puts funny ‘un-american’ mustard on his food,.
-he works in the oval office without a jacket on..
-he got a ‘special’ dog for his kids
-he actually went out for a burger, and paid for it.
-he laughs at jokes
next, god forbid, he’ll be eating arugula and
start wind surfing,
i wish we would get back to the days when the president cleared brush on his phony ranch

Posted by: Geeter | May 18, 2009, 3:05 am 3:05 am

Zolpidem eszopiclone indications.

Zolpidem.

Posted by: Zolpidem. | August 23, 2009, 4:27 am 4:27 am

Carisoprodol addiction.

Carisoprodol buy cheap carisoprodol order online.

Posted by: Carisoprodol buy cheap carisoprodol order online. | August 23, 2009, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm

How long is oxycodone in your system.

Oxycodone m357. Generic oxycodone. Oxycodone. Side effects of oxycodone.

Posted by: Oxycodone dosages. | August 24, 2009, 3:11 am 3:11 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.