A Collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh

Guantanamo accusations questioned after review turns up basic errors

[JURIST] Accusations against Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees made in declassified documents contain basic factual errors and easily-refuted claims, the Boston Globe reported Friday. After reviewing declassified records, Globe journalists uncovered a number of simple mistakes that they said raised "questions about whether the US military has thoroughly investigated its cases against the roughly 400 inmates." Lawyers defending detainees have said that false accusations strengthen the need for new judicial procedures at the prison in the wake of the US Supreme Court decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [text], in which the court ruled last month that military commissions as initially constituted lack proper legal authorization [JURIST report]. Prior to the Hamdan decision, ten Guantanamo detainees awaited military trials.

Both the House and Senate Armed Services Committee have hosted hearings this week on the future status of military trials for detainees. House Republicans pushed for legislation authorizing military commissions on Wednesday, while military lawyers pressed the Senate [JURIST reports] Thursday for an approach more along the lines of court-martial governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice [text]. Also on Thursday, Sen. John Warner (R-VA) [official website] said that legislation authorizing military commissions for detainees is "imperative" by the end of the year [JURIST report]. The Boston Globe has more.

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.