Sarah Ludford MEP

Hope for Guantanamo prisoners trapped in legal no-man's land

12.00.00am BST (GMT +0100) Thu 21st Oct 2004

A petition of support signed by 271 UK and European parliamentarians has been filed with the District Court of Washington, DC. The document known as an 'Amicus Brief' supports a US military lawyer's plea to challenge the constitutionality of the US military tribunal system for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

On 28th June 2004, the Supreme Court of the United States of America ruled that American courts can challenge the legality of detaining foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and held at Guantanamo Bay.

But on 7th July 2004, the US Justice Department ruled that cases regarding Guantanamo Bay detainees would be reviewed by military tribunals, arguing that prisoners had no constitutional rights and there was no obligation to allow them access to lawyers.

Baroness Sarah Ludford, London MEP and European justice spokeswoman for the Liberal Democrats said:

"It is as though the Supreme Court ruling never happened. The fate of Guantanamo Bay detainees should not be left up to the conscience of military tribunal lawyers, like Lt Cmdr Charles Swift who recognise that military tribunal systems lack all the essential ingredients needed for a fair trial."

Bookmark this story at: del.icio.usdel.icio.us DiggDigg FacebookFacebook LibDigLibDig redditreddit StumbleUponStumbleUpon
Print this news story.
Previous news story: LONDON LIB DEM EURO-MP WELCOMES "BOOZE CRUISE" DECISION (Wed 20th Oct 2004).
Next news story: Barroso's proposal unacceptable, says Sarah Ludford MEP (Thu 21st Oct 2004).

Related News Stories:

Thu 26th Jun 2008:

Thu 28th Feb 2008:

Thu 27th Sep 2007:

Wed 22nd Sep 2004:

Related Speeches:

Thu 3rd Apr 2003:

Wed 12th Mar 2003:

Printed and hosted by Prater Raines Ltd, 98 Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BY.
Published and promoted by Ashley Lumsden on behalf of Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP and the Liberal Democrats, all at 4 Cowley Street, London SW1P 3NB.
The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider.