Preview

Law Government & Policy

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2193 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Law Government & Policy
David Hicks an Australian formerly detained in Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist recently said he was pleased the authorities seemed to have concluded that his conviction at Guantanamo was ‘unfair’ and ‘obtained through duress’. He said ‘I feel like this acknowledges Guantanamo Bay and everything is illegal.’ Critically evaluate
David Hicks’ ENTIRE statement in light of whether or not Human Rights are adequately provided for in the Australian legal and political system.

David Hicks an Australian who was detained in Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist, recently Hicks said ‘he was pleased the authorities seemed to have concluded that his conviction at Guantanamo was ‘unfair’ and ‘obtained through duress’, he went on to say ‘I feel like this acknowledges Guantanamo Bay and everything is illegal.’ The question here is are David Hicks assumptions correct and does the government believe that his ‘Human Rights’ were violated in Guantanamo Bay and also under Australia’s current legal and political system, would those same Human Rights issues be adequately provided for?

David Hicks made a personal choice to embrace the Islamic faith, which lead him to Afghanistan where he chose to take up arms and train in the Taliban and Al Qaeda training camps. In December, 2001, David Hicks was captured by the Northern Alliance, who were searching for foreign nationals believed to have been involved with the Taliban. Hicks when captured had already discarded his military uniform for civilian clothes and he was making for the border of Pakistan. He was handed over to the US Military; transferred to Guantanamo Bay, where he was held for almost six years without a trial. It was this incrassation and his accusations of mistreatment at the hands of the American Military, that have sparked much debate in Australia as to his “human Rights’ whilst in detention of suspected terrorists.

There is no doubt that Federal laws passed since the 11 September 2001’ due to the ‘War on Terror’,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    An assumption made by the Bush administration in selecting this location was that it was beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. The administration wanted to avoid any judicial oversight of how it handled detainees, characterized as “enemy combatants.” A possible legal challenge to indefinite detention with no formal charges or judicial proceedings might arise from the habeas corpus provision of the Constitution.…

    • 6132 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hamdi vs Rumsfeld

    • 958 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Yaser Esam Hamdi, an American citizen, was captured in Afghanistan shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Hamdi was classified as an “enemy combatant” by the United States. His father filed a petition of Habeas Corpus that his fifth and fourteenth amendments were in violation. Although the petition did not specify on the actual circumstances of Hamdi’s capture and detention, the record indicated that Hamdi went to Afghanistan to do “relief work” less than two months before September 11th and could have not received military training. The Special Advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Michael Mobbs, issued a response, outlining the Government’s position. The district court found the “Mobbs Declaration” insufficient in supporting the Government’s case. The Mobbs Declaration provided details regarding Hamdi’s trip to Afghanistan, his affiliation with the Taliban during a time when the Taliban was battling U.S. allies, and lastly his surrender of an assault rifle. The District Court found that the Mobbs Declaration, standing alone, did not support Hamdi’s detention and ordered the Government to turn over numerous materials. The Fourth Circuit reversed, stressing that it was undisputed that Hamdi was captured in an active combat zone, no factual inquiry or evidentiary hearing allowed Hamdi to be heard or to rebut the Government’s claims were necessary or proper. If the Mobbs Declaration was accurate, it provided a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the President had constitutionally detained Hamdi, the court ordered the habeas petition dismissed. The appeals court held that, “no citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress”. This provides that The AUMF’s “necessary and appropriate force” language provided the authorization for Hamdi’s detention. Also that Hamdi is entitled only to a limited judicial inquiry into his detention’s rationality under…

    • 958 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Soon after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration developed a plan for holding and interrogating captured prisoners. They were sent to a prison inside a U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, on land leased from the government of Cuba. Since 2002, over 700 men have been detained at “GITMO.” Most have been released without charges or turned over to other governments. In 2011, Congress specifically prohibited the expenditure of funds to transfer GITMO prisoners to detention facilities in the continental United States, making it virtually impossible to try them in civilian courts. As of April 2012, 169 remained in detention at GITMO (Sutton, 2012).…

    • 36699 Words
    • 107 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hamdi VS Rumsfeld

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Legal Issue/ Legal question: The Legal Issue is Due Process. According to the Habeas "litigation" the questions were can the United States hold American citizens as enemy combatants without charging them with a crime, and without the due process clause? The other question was If a detainee tries to go against his enemy combatant status, what rights does he have to go against it?…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Federman, C. (2014). Habeas Corpus in the Age of Guantanamo. Retrieved on February 2, 2015 from http://www.academia.edu/692284/Habeas_corpus_in_the_age_of_Guantanamo…

    • 1990 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Soon after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration developed a plan for holding and interrogating captured prisoners. They were sent to a prison inside a U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, on land leased from the government of Cuba. Since 2002, over 700 men have been detained at “GITMO.” Most have been released without charges or turned over to other governments. In 2011, Congress specifically prohibited the expenditure of funds to transfer GITMO prisoners to detention facilities in the continental United States, making it virtually impossible to try them in civilian courts. As of April 2012, 169 remained in detention at GITMO (Sutton, 2012).…

    • 8316 Words
    • 26 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    POL 201 Final Paper

    • 1580 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In this paper I will be deliberate on the history of Habeas Corpus and how it has matured over the years. I will describe the beginning of the Habeas Corpus and the position it takes part in the U.S. and what recent act is being used. The United States Constitution must be more effectively unified into the Guantanamo methods to give equal civil rights to inmates despite what their nationality maybe, but to also have more cordial ways of reviewing obstructive servicemen to absolutely verify if they really should be treated as extremists that we should fear.…

    • 1580 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the opinion piece, A sorry state? Written on 2nd of august 2007, Professor Janice Stevens opposes in an alarmed and critical tone that the treatment of David Hicks in Guantanamo Bay is a violation of human rights and that Australia’s response only shows that other citizens should be scared of themselves being held in such a state. In a sophisticated style the article addresses at an educated adult audience, or to those who are concerned about the treatment of their fellow citizens.…

    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Harnoor Chatha Professor Sumstad English-1002-16 October 19, 2014 Rhetorical Analysis Final Draft Deborah Pearlstein author, of Rights in an Insecure World, is the Director of the United States Law and Security Program at Human Rights First. Pearlstein’s purpose is to elaborate and examine different ways our rights are redefined against us after September 11 attack. The Author emphasize her claim about Liberty and Security after September 11 attack on the United States. Author’s intended audience is informing U.S. citizens and criticizing the Government officials (FBI, CIA, and interrogation team at Guantanamo Bay). Author’s main goal is to elaborate and compare how Liberty and Security rights are being violated before and after the September…

    • 1073 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Guantanamo Bay Vs 9/11

    • 1651 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Instead of calling the alleged Taliban and Al-Qaeda detainees “prisoners of war”, the Bush administration called them “unlawful enemy combatants”. By doing so, the Bush administration denied the detainees all rights of prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. If the detainees at Guantanamo had prisoner of war status, they would be protected under the Third Geneva Convention against the inhumane treatment and the forceful extraction of information they faced in the detention camp. By interpreting the Third Geneva Convention in a literal manner, the Bush administration justified their decision to name the detainees at Guantanamo “unlawful enemy combatants”. According to the Bush administration and American lawyer John C. Yoo, because the Taliban was a “failed state”, its militia was not entitled to protection under the Conventions. In addition, because Taliban and al-Qaeda soldiers did not wear uniforms in combat they were not prisoners of…

    • 1651 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Have you ever felt like a piece of cheese on a mouse trap just waiting for that mouse to come by and eat you; maybe even a fly stuck in a spider’s web hoping that you can get away? Well I am sure if I had been one of those people in the mist of the chaos on September 11, 2001 that had changed the life of all Americans’ across the country. I would have felt no bigger than that piece of cheese or that fly caught in the web. We were victims of a horrific terrorist attack that shook the very core of our foundation as a country. Twelve years later we are still recovering from this horrendous act. We have been fighting the war on terror for ten years. This is one of the longest wars that the United States has ever fought. While the war rages on the boundaries between national security and civil liberties are blurred. “The big threat to America is the way we react to terrorism by throwing away what everybody values about our country—a commitment to human rights” (Kennedy, 2007). Individual liberties and freedoms are important since without them one can be held indefinitely. Habeas corpus does not infringe upon a person’s civil liberties. In addition, habeas corpus allows an individual to question why they are being detained and ensures that detainees have a right to a fair trial; it is considered to be one of the foundations of constitutional democracy.…

    • 2236 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Guantanamo Bay is a US prison for terrorists and other threatening people, located off of US soil. This means that the processes that go on in the institution, legally, do not need to follow US rules. Many painful and tortuous things are performed on the prisoners, such as force feeding and the topic of this essay, water boarding, where the victim is made to feel as though they are drowning. Although Gitmo is legal/allowed to an extent, it still begs the question how the guards consciously perform such cruel acts and what I would do if I were faced with the decision of torturing a prisoner or not.…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    5. U.S.-Freed ‘Combatant’ Is Returned to Saudi Arabia, L.A. TIMES, Oct. 12, 2004, at A8; Jerry Markon, Father Denounces Hamdi’s Imprisonment; Son Posed No Threat to U.S., He Says, WASH. POST, Oct. 13, 2004, at A4.…

    • 1666 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Civil Liberties History

    • 2698 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Habeas corpus and the war on terror have only grown increasingly relevant as days pass. One of the more well-known uses of habeas corpus stems from the September 11, 2001 attacks against the United States. It was on the wake of this historical tragedy that President Bush not only launched a war on terrorism, but the USA PATRIOIT Act of 2001 was passed. As a wartime measure, the PATRIOT Act allowed federal authorities to arrest and hold suspected terrorists without filing formal charges. Individuals detained on suspicion of terrorism were not entitled to an attorney (Levin-Waldman, 2012). In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), the Supreme Court ruled the prisoners had limited rights at his or her disposal with which to challenge the enemy combatant characterization (Foley, 2007). The debate over habeas corpus has erupted in an emotional time of healing for United States citizens. What is difficult to grasp is that in the midst of tragedy, in the center of emotional turmoil, in the middle of a nation full of questions, habeas corpus is a civil liberty, like many others that desperately required clarification in a changing…

    • 2698 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Best Essays

    Habeas Corpus

    • 1542 Words
    • 7 Pages

    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.…

    • 1542 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Best Essays