Habeas Corpus
Habeas Corpus and the War on Terror
The law of Habeas Corpus was created to permit the guilty to present their case in court and to be tried fairly. In today 's war on terror, the amount of such enemy combatants who were detained indefinitely without any trial has raised. The courts are split up on following the law by the letter or to practically change it according to the situation 's needs. I feel it 's necessary to follow these laws in the same context in which they were written, and the pragmatic approach leaves room for reckless changes. To deny an enemy combatant his or her day in court cannot be justified as taking the pragmatic approach in dealing with war criminals. This paper is an attempt to present the state of law today towards war criminals and the implications of denying the basic right of Habeas Corpus to suspected terrorists. Ever since the onset of civilization, arguments have routinely erupted between various members, families, factions, and groups within civilizations and between civilizations. In ancient times, arguments would be resolved by crude means, means not limited to the powerful person using brute force to show he was in the right. The stronger person would always have, say for example, the first right to food, to agricultural produce, cattle and to wealth etc. The weak wouldn’t dare pick an argument over the stronger person in fear for their life. But as civilizations grew and advanced over time, a code of ethics and laws began to form. Societies began to incorporate and adapt these laws in their daily functioning. Drawing inspiration from religion, past civilization practices and their mistakes, it was only natural that basic human rights were thought about and codified. The rights were guaranteed to all human beings, irrespective of who was physically stronger.
The American Revolution has beyond doubt shaped the basic structure of human rights for the entire world to follow. Among many undeniable rights to
The law of Habeas Corpus was created to permit the guilty to present their case in court and to be tried fairly. In today 's war on terror, the amount of such enemy combatants who were detained indefinitely without any trial has raised. The courts are split up on following the law by the letter or to practically change it according to the situation 's needs. I feel it 's necessary to follow these laws in the same context in which they were written, and the pragmatic approach leaves room for reckless changes. To deny an enemy combatant his or her day in court cannot be justified as taking the pragmatic approach in dealing with war criminals. This paper is an attempt to present the state of law today towards war criminals and the implications of denying the basic right of Habeas Corpus to suspected terrorists. Ever since the onset of civilization, arguments have routinely erupted between various members, families, factions, and groups within civilizations and between civilizations. In ancient times, arguments would be resolved by crude means, means not limited to the powerful person using brute force to show he was in the right. The stronger person would always have, say for example, the first right to food, to agricultural produce, cattle and to wealth etc. The weak wouldn’t dare pick an argument over the stronger person in fear for their life. But as civilizations grew and advanced over time, a code of ethics and laws began to form. Societies began to incorporate and adapt these laws in their daily functioning. Drawing inspiration from religion, past civilization practices and their mistakes, it was only natural that basic human rights were thought about and codified. The rights were guaranteed to all human beings, irrespective of who was physically stronger.
The American Revolution has beyond doubt shaped the basic structure of human rights for the entire world to follow. Among many undeniable rights to
References: A brief history of habeas corpus. (2005, March 9). Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4329839.stm Balko, R. (2012). U.s. drone policy: Standing near terrorists makes you a terrorist. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/29/drone-attacks-innocent-civilians_n_1554380.html Cohn, M. (2007, February 27). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/02/why-boumediene-was-wrongly-decided.php DUEHOLM, J. (2008). Journal of the abraham lincoln association. Retrieved from http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0029.205?rgn=main;view=fulltext Levin-Waldman, O. M. (2012). American government. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Niday, J. (2008). The war against terror as war against the Constitution. Canadian Review of American Studies, 38(1), 101-117. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database.