Jump to content

Military tribunals in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pbsturte (talk | contribs) at 20:45, 29 June 2006 (→‎Trial by military commission of the Guantanamo detainees). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|November 2005|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
 A military tribunal is a kind of military court designed to try members of enemy forces during war time, operating outside the scope of conventional criminal and civil matters; the judges are military officers; and the judges fulfill the role of jurors.

A military tribunal is an inquisitorial system based on charges brought by a military authority, prosecuted by a military authority, judged by military officers, and sentenced by military officers against a member of an adversarial force.

File:NurembergTrials.jpg
The Nuremberg Trials is one of the best known military tribunals.

Military tribunals in the United States

The United States has, infrequently, made use of military tribunals or commissions, rather than rely on courts martial, within the military justice system. General George Washington used military tribunals during the American Revolution.

President Abraham Lincoln used military tribunals during and after the American Civil War.

President Franklin Roosevelt ordered military tribunals for some German prisoners accused of sabotage as part of the German Operation Pastorius. His decision sparked controversy: some critics thought that the tribunals were unjust. The suspects were not aware that one of the suspects had been promised immunity if he implicated the other saboteurs. The convicted suspects were executed by firing squad the same day they were convicted. The suspect who had been promised immunity was given a thirty year sentence.

Court system

Military tribunals are led by a Presiding Officer designated by the Appointing Authority (which is the Secretary of Defense or other designated authority); the Presiding Officer does not take part of the final court decision.

Charges are brought by the Chief Prosecutor from the Office of Military Commissions (OMC). Charges that maybe be brought to a military tribunal range from murder, rape, and other typical crimes, to war-specific crimes, like attacking civilians, using human shields, terrorism, and war crimes in general.

The Military Tribunal Panel is composed of three to seven judging officers, depending on the charges raised against the accused. They act as judges and jurors.

While civilian juries require a unanimity to convict, tribunals only require two thirds majority when no death penalty is involved, for death penalty convictable tribunals, full seven judging officers panel is required to have a unanimous decision.

The accused is represented by Office of the Chief Defense Counsel from the Office of Military Commissions (OMC), defendants may choose an available civilian defense attorney.

Civilian attorneys must be qualified by the Office of Military Commissions before being eligible to be selected by a defendant.

After the end of trial, the tribunal goes onto review by the Secretary of Defense, who will forward the record of trial and all recommendations to the President for final decision.

Jurisdiction

Military tribunals have jurisdiction over any person under custody of the United States armed forces, no matter how he was captured or in what country it is, who is an enemy combatant and charged with crimes by a military authority.[citation needed]

Controversy

While tribunals can provide for quick trials under the conditions of war, many say that occurs at the expense of fair justice. Rules for admissible evidence are usually more lax than in civilian trials; hearsay, if it would have “probative value to a reasonable person”; and secret evidence can be used to convict defendants.

Time constraints and the inability to obtain evidence can greatly hamper a case for the defense. Civilian trials must be open to the public, while military tribunals can be held in secret. Because conviction usually relies on some sort of majority quota, the separability problem can easily cause the verdict to be displeasing not only to the defendant, but to the tribunal officials as well.

Decisions made by a military tribunal cannot be appealed to federal courts, the only way to appeal is a petition for a panel of review which may include civilians as well as military officers, to review decisions. The president, as commander in chief, has final review of all appeals.

Opponents of military tribunals argue that such courts would violate guarantees provided by the constitution.

Trial by military commission of the Guantanamo detainees

President George W. Bush has ordered that the detainees imprisoned at the Naval base on Guantanamo Bay were to be tried by military commissions. This decision has sparked controversy; on June 29th 2006 the US Supreme court strongly limited the power of the Bush administration to conduct military tribunals to suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. The current military tribunals have been stopped, and the pending 60 other suspects' tribunals have been cancelled. This has been seen as a huge blow to the Bush administration.

Main article: Guantanamo military commission

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Military_tribunals_in_the_United_States&oldid=61260902"