The Washington Post’s Peter Finn reports that “60 to 70 detainees could be prosecuted in military commissions, but that some of those cases will go to federal court and some, in the end, may not go to trial at all. The administration is expected to make a series of announcements in coming weeks about which prisoners will be prosecuted, and where, and how it will institute a system of indefinite detention for those deemed too dangerous to release but who cannot be prosecuted.”

Finn plays up a possible pilot case in Barack Obama’s version of military commissions — the prosecution of Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al Qosi. Qosi’s alleged crime is that he was a bodyguard and driver for Osama Bin Laden. If this sounds familiar it’s because another Bin Laden driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, was the first al-Qaeda figure tried and sentenced under the George W. Bush version of military commissions (Hamdan is now free and back in Yemen). It’s not the greatest argument for the sanctity and national security necessity of military tribunals if we’re using it to try the terrorist’s chauffeur. Why can’t Qosi be tried under material support of terrorism charges in federal court?

Comment RSS - You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.