Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
In particular, the Geneva Convention (note: treaties supercede all US law except the Constitution) requires "regularly constituted tribunals" for trying prisoners for war crimes. Because Congress and the Supreme Court, not the President, has the authority to make courts, these military tribunals were not "regularly constituted tribunals" and did not fit the Geneva Convention, and were therefore not worth spit -- according to the court.
|
Point is WELL taken. But.....
the Geneva Convention does NOT apply to guerillas, partisans, terrorists and franc-tireuers (para-military groups)! The Hague convention does, and it does NOT afford the same protections to members of those groups that the Third Geneva Convention does. In fact, according to the Hague convention, members of those groups can be SUMMARILY executed WITHOUT legal ramifications for the executing parties! Shocked the blazes out of me, but I saw it in black and white!
THAT's why David Hicks status IS all important. And it's a two-edged sword! If he IS a POW, then he gets Geneva Convention protections but he can be held until cessation of hostilities. If he is held under a different classification he is NOT afford protection under the Geneva Convention and it's a WHOLE new ballgame. Somehow, I could not get some people to see the important distinction.
Damn, got sucked back in AGAIN! rotfl
PS: I'm not disputing the legal status of the tribunals. I will defer to your legal expertise on that one. [img]smile.gif[/img]
[ 11-28-2006, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Micah Foehammer ]