The querulous Eric L. Bainter replies to George Guttman’s views and verbiage.
Mr. Guttman writes:
Why is a US military tribunal “wrong” for foreign terrorists… when it is also what US military personnel face.
I agree with his basic message – that there’s nothing wrong with the military tribunals for foreign terrorists/war criminals – but his comment as stated is incorrect in strictly factual terms. There’s enough loose verbiage flying around about the tribunals now, generally from the anti-tribunal crowd, which certainly undermines their positions.
Military personnel face trial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is largely similar to US law for civilians, not a tribunal as laid out in Mr. Bush’s executive order. The UCMJ does have some differences from most civilian trials. For example, UCMJ panels (juries) can generally convict with a two-thirds, except, I believe, in capital cases (maybe some JAG out there can comment).
I told our local JAG office that I would be happy to serve on a tribunal, and I eagerly (if not optimistically) await the call.
Eric L. Bainter
