WASHINGTON — Twenty retired federal judges, two rear admirals and a Marine general joined 383 current or former members of the European and British parliaments on Friday in urging the Supreme Court to grant detainees at Guantanamo Bay full access to the U.S. court system.
Lower court rulings supporting the Bush administration's opposition to full court access "were seized upon by repressive governments as a license to incarcerate their own citizens and others with impunity," 25 retired American diplomats wrote in one court filing.
In June, the Supreme Court agreed to take the detainees' case, reversing a decision in April not to hear arguments over whether the prisoners can use federal courts to challenge their confinement. Court filings by the Bush administration in the case are due on Oct. 9.
The 383 European politicians of divergent political views said it is important that even when faced with the threat of international terrorism, all states, including the United States, comply with the standards set by international humanitarian law and human rights law by granting full court access.
"The treatment of petitioners currently falls short of these standards," the European diplomats said.
Currently, the 355 detainees have only narrowly structured appeal rights. They are entitled to a single civilian court review of their status as enemy combatants, a designation made by three-member military panels. The detainees have no legal counsel before the military panels, which rely largely on classified information that the detainees are not allowed to see.
The panels, called Combatant Status Review Tribunals, have been tainted by the permissible use of evidence obtained by torture, said a court filing by two former Navy judge advocates general and the former senior legal adviser for the Marine Corps.
"If the United States holds prisoners indefinitely — potentially lifetime imprisonment — based on sham CSRT proceedings and without providing meaningful judicial review of their imprisonment, enemies in current or future conflicts may use that as an excuse to mete out similar treatment to captured American military forces," said the three.
They are Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms, the senior legal adviser for the Marine Corps from 1985-88; Rear Adm. Donald J. Guter the Navy's judge advocate general from 2000 to 2002; and Rear Adm. John D. Hutson, the Navy's judge advocate general from 1997 to 2000.
The 20 retired federal judges, both Republicans and Democrats, said the stringent review procedure "corrupts the judicial function" because it does not provide for fact-finding into whether statements were obtained by torture.
"The English common law and our nation's fundamental traditions condemn judicial reliance upon statements extracted by torture or other impermissible coercion," the retired judges' brief stated. "There are substantial allegations, however, that Combatant Status Review Tribunal panels have relied on such statements."