Jose Padilla

WASHINGTON, December 19 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – U.S. courts dealt a double blow to U.S. President George W. Bush's prosecution of “the war on terror”, with rulings that his administration was abusing the rights of detainees.

According to Agence France-Presse (AFP) Friday, December 19, one court said inmates at the U.S. detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be allowed access to lawyers and the court system.

A second ruled that an American, Jose Padilla, suspected of involvement in an al-Qaeda plot, could not be held as an enemy combatant.

In San Francisco, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals made a 2-1 decision harshly critical of the detention of the 660 prisoners at Guantanamo without charge or the protection of the Geneva Convention.

Most were captured in Afghanistan when the United States toppled the Taliban regime and routed the al-Qaeda network Washington blames for the September 11 attacks in 2001.

"Even in times of national emergency ... it is the obligation of the judicial branch to ensure the preservation of our constitutional values and to prevent the executive branch from running roughshod over the rights of citizens and aliens alike," the court was quoted by AFP as saying.

The ruling was issued in a case filed by Belaid Gherebi on behalf of his brother, Faren, a Libyan who is being held at Guantanamo.

The court said it could not accept that the U.S. administration possessed the "unchecked authority" to detain anyone under U.S. jurisdiction and control "without permitting such prisoners recourse of any kind to any judicial forum, or even access to counsel."

Such a position was "so extreme" that it raised the "gravest concerns" under both U.S. and international law, according to AFP, citing the court ruling.

The court's findings are unlikely to have any short-term impact, as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on the whole issue of the Guantanamo detainees next year.

This judgment - from a court known for its hostility to the Bush administration - will probably not take effect until the Court rules next year on the issue and it could be overturned, according to the BBC Washington Correspondent.

Prior to Thursday's decision, U.S. authorities had taken a small step by naming a military defense counsel for one of six detainees at Guantanamo who has been singled out by Bush for possible trial by a military commission.

No Right

Guantanamo detentions were "so extreme" that it raised the "gravest concerns" under U.S. and international law

The other bad news for the government came when a federal appeals court in New York ruled that Bush did not have the right to detain an American citizen seized on U.S. soil, as an "enemy combatant" and ordered his release within 30 days.

Jose Padilla - suspected of plotting with al-Qaeda a radioactive bomb attack on U.S. soil - has been held without charge at a Naval brig in South Carolina since June last year.

"Presidential authority does not exist in a vacuum," the court said in another 2-1 majority decision that stressed Bush would require specific Congressional authorization to detain Padilla in such a fashion.

"The President's inherent constitutional powers do not extend to the detention as an enemy combatant of an American citizen seized within the country away from a zone of combat," it said.

Noting that Padilla was alleged to have committed "heinous crimes," the court said he should be transferred to the appropriate civil authorities who can bring criminal charges against him.

“Flawed”

Responding, the White House described the ruling as "troubling and flawed," while the Justice Department said it would seek a stay and appeal the decision.

"In times of war, the President must have the authority to act when an individual associated with our nation's enemies enters our country to endanger American lives," said department spokesman Mark Corallo.

American University professor Robert Dinerstein told AFP the two decisions, and other legal challenges to the administration's counter-terrorist policies, showed the executive had "gone too far" in denying individuals their basic rights.

"It would be wonderful to get as much information as you need to reduce the threat of terrorism, but a civilized society that believes in the rule of law has to balance that against the rights that we cherish," the civil liberties expert said.

Steven Shapiro, legal director with the American Civil Liberties Union, said the common thread binding both rulings was an affirmation of a commitment to checks and balances on executive power.

"The Bush administration is mistaken if it believes the proper way to fight the war on terrorism is to ignore the courts and the Congress," Shapiro said.