Guantanamo And Beyond: Dangers Of Rigging The Rules

31949 Words128 Pages
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 97 Issue 4 Summer Summer 2007 Article 2 Guantanamo and Beyond: Dangers of Rigging the Rules Brian J. Foley Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Brian J. Foley, Guantanamo and Beyond: Dangers of Rigging the Rules, 97 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 1009 (2006-2007) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University…show more content…
Instead, it can be relied on only to ensure that anyone detained will remain detained. I also explain how the U.S. Supreme Court, in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,6 unfortunately helped lay the groundwork for the CSRT's rigged rules. I examine the rigged rules for the Administrative Review Board ("ARB"), which is set up to review annually a prisoner's dangerousness, and the rules for the military commissions, which the Bush Administration has created to make it easy to convict enemy combatants for particular war- and terrorismcrimes. Part III is the heart of the Article. I show how these rigged rules are dangerous because they negatively impact the accuracy of terrorism investigations. The CSRT and military commissions actually foster the gathering of false confessions and other false information from suspected prisoners, which can mislead investigators. Part of the problem is the aforementioned fact that coercive interrogation techniques are applied to prisoners who lack relevant knowledge of terrorism. There are other problems as well. A system designed to help the government win its cases can lead investigators to apply less rigor than they would need to win in a regular court system. Consequently, they learn less about the terrorist networks they must disrupt. Part IV proposes that new rules dedicated to reaching accurate determinations of terrorist status and individualized guilt for terrorist crimes be designed and implemented as a productive tool in the War on Terrorism. I make some suggestions for the form some of those rules should take. B. BACKGROUND: WRONG DEBATE, WRONG PREMISES-NATIONAL SECURITY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE NOT
Open Document